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
Although, as we have said, the characteristic note of our industrial
demobilization abroad was outright cancellation of contracts and the
payment of indemnities, the policy was not maintained consistently.
There were several important exceptions, and one of these was the
method adopted in terminating the British manufacture of artillery
and shell for the A. E. F. The numerous orders, contracts, and
agreements placed and made by the A. E. F. for the delivery of British
artillery and ammunition were consolidated, on October 19, 1918, by Mr.
Stettinius in conference with Mr. Winston Churchill, then the British
Minister of Munitions, into a single formal agreement. In terminating
this contract after the armistice Mr. Stettinius assumed that it would
be better to accept completed guns and ammunition, even though these
might be surplus above the future requirements of the Army, than to
pay heavy cancellation indemnities and receive nothing in return.
Artillery does not deteriorate rapidly, either materially or in design.
The negotiations opened by Mr. Stettinius with the British Government
looking to this end were picked up by the Liquidation Commission,
which, in March, 1919, reached an agreement with the British that, in
lieu of paying any cancellation damages, the United States would accept
a limited quantity of _matériel_ completed after the armistice under
the American contract.
America accordingly accepted the post-armistice delivery of 498
British-made guns, ranging in model from 60-pounders to 8-inch
howitzers, and 420,000 rounds of ammunition for them. For this
_matériel_ the American Government paid £6,637,598.
A most interesting negotiation conducted by the Liquidation Commission
for the United States was that which wound up the tripartite
international project for the construction of 36-ton tanks, better
known as the Anglo-American Mark VIII tanks. France was originally a
party to this transaction only to the extent of agreeing to provide a
site for the assembling plant in France. England and the United States
were equal partners in the enterprise, England supplying hulls and
guns and America the power and traction. The French, however, were to
be permitted to buy tanks at the partnership price; but the French
at first did not ask for any, asserting that their own light tank
production was sufficient for them.
The plant was built at Châteauroux, Neuvy-Pailloux. About the time the
project was getting well under way, heavier tanks began to demonstrate
their effectiveness in the field; and then France insisted that,
because her armies held the most front-line mileage, the most of the
Anglo-American tanks to be built at the Châteauroux plant should be
allotted to her. Reluctantly the British agreed that the first 1,200
tanks should be divided equally between France and the United States
and that France should receive all of the next 300.
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