Demobilization : $b our industrial and military demobilization after the armistice, 1918-1920Crowell, Benedict
History
Demobilization : $b our industrial and military demobilization after the armistice, 1918-1920
Crowell, Benedict
United States. Army. American Expeditionary Forces -- Demobilization; World War, 1914-1918 -- United States
_Cincinnati._ Southern Ohio, Indiana, and the South. Was the chief
nitrogen-fixation district and the chief producer of smokeless powder.
Included Dayton, with 200 factories exclusively engaged in munitions
production. Produced tanks, shell, fuses, optical instruments, and
machine tools for war factories. District chief, Mr. C. L. Harrison, a
Cincinnati capitalist.
_St. Louis._ Included southern Indiana and sixteen western states.
Produced black walnut, toluol, and picric acid. Chief, Mr. Marvin E.
Singleton, former president of the East St. Louis Cotton Oil Company.
After the armistice the manufacturing committees in charge of the
twelve American ordnance districts became, without essential change in
their organization, the ordnance district claims boards. Each board
consisted of seven members--business men and at least one lawyer--with
such technical assistants as they needed. The first executive act in
demobilization for these boards to make was to determine what war
contracts were to be terminated immediately, what ones were to be
tapered off with a minimum expense to the Government and a minimum
disturbance to industry and labor, and what ones were to be carried
through to completion.
It was often advantageous to allow the contractors to proceed
undisturbed. Some of these ordnance supplies, which would be valuable
and essential items of our military equipment for years to come, were
only just reaching the stage of production in the factories, after many
months of costly experiment and preparation. It was obviously unwise
to interrupt these projects with nothing to show for them except heavy
bills of expenses. Then, too, it was sometimes of financial advantage
to the Government to allow a contract to go through to completion. A
contractor in the Chicago district, for example, had nearly completed
the manufacture of several large machines for installation in an
eastern munitions plant. To cancel the contract would have cost the
Government $90,000 in a settlement and left on its hands a quantity
of semi-finished materials having only junk value. The Government
no longer had use for the finished machines; yet it would cost only
$14,000 more to go on and complete them. This was done, and the
Ordnance Department was later able to sell the machines to a private
buyer for more than $100,000, thus recovering practically all the money
it paid to the contractor.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account