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
The most spectacular accomplishment of the Construction Division
before the armistice was the building of the cantonments, the primary
training camps which housed the soldiers summoned into the military
service by the Selective Service Law. These were much more substantial
installations than the national guard camps, the salvaging of six
of which was noted in the tabular statement above. The national
guard camps provided only tentage for the shelter of troops, whereas
the cantonments housed their inhabitants in stanch wooden barrack
buildings. A cantonment cost from two to three times as much as a
national guard camp. Yet, on three months’ notice, at the beginning
of which not even the sites had yet been selected and acquired, the
Construction Division prepared sixteen cantonments ready to receive the
first inductives called to the colors.
The cantonments originally were all built upon leased ground. It was
evident that, if the Government were forced to vacate the ground to the
owners, the cantonments, salvaged for their building materials, would
bring no greater recovery percentage of their cost than did the tentage
camps. The Government’s loss, in such an event, on each cantonment
would be twice or three times what it proved to be on the national
guard camps. Before the end of the war was in sight the Construction
Division had anticipated demobilization by presenting a plan to the
Secretary of War for the purchase of the sites of the cantonments.
Purchase would accomplish several desirable ends. As long as the
cantonments were in use it would save the payment of rents. After the
war was over, if the cantonments were retained by the Army, it would
give the cantonments their full use-value, which was every penny they
had cost. If, on the other hand, the decision was to dispose of them
after the advent of peace, then ownership of the sites would permit the
Government (1) to market the materials gradually and avoid beating down
prices by glutting the market; or (2) to sell buildings intact, with
the land on which they stood; or (3) to sell entire cantonments as they
stood, together with title to the lands. Any one of these methods of
disposition would bring a far greater salvage return than the forced
sale of the materials and the payment of property damages.
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