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
Now there was to the federal contracting rule one other exception
which was, for our purposes here, the most important of all. The
law authorized the Secretary of War to enter into contracts without
the formality of advertising and soliciting bids, _in the event
of a national emergency_. We had not yet been a week at war with
Germany when the Secretary of War issued proclamation declaring such
an emergency to exist. His signature to this document swept away
the most serious legal restrictions which circumscribed the War
Department’s contracting powers. The hand of the Department had been
further strengthened by the National Defense Act (passed in 1916),
which empowered the Secretary of War, “in time of war, or when war
is imminent,” to command a manufacturer to produce supplies for the
United States at prices fixed by the War Department itself; and if
the producer refused this arrangement, then the Act empowered the
Secretary to commandeer and take over the producer’s business, paying
the producer, however, a fair and just compensation.
Competition for the Government’s contracts under the normal procedure
would have been fatal to both speed and secrecy in the procurement of
war supplies, and therefore the law wisely permitted the War Department
to abandon competition in the emergency of war. But, with the safeguard
of the competitive bid abandoned, it is reasonable to suppose that the
officers of the War Department, if they were faithful servants of the
public, would seek to protect the Government against the extortioner
by the substitution of other devices not open to the objection either
of delaying the war manufacturing program or of betraying its nature
and extent. And so they did. And although the methods of applying the
protection were numerous, the essence of it was that the contractor
was required by the terms of his contract to produce war supplies at
cost, plus a profit for himself, the profit being reckoned in various
ways. A contract of this sort was known as a cost-plus contract.
Contracts of the normal, older sort, in which the Government dealt with
the lowest bidder or with a producer with whom the law empowered the
federal purchasers to deal directly without competition, were known as
fixed-price or lump-sum contracts.
The cost-plus contract was not entirely unknown to American business
before the war, but it had been employed only sparingly. The war
brought the form into great prominence, since much of the most
important war business was conducted on the cost-plus plan. It is
noteworthy that the form has persisted to some extent in American
private business, and particularly in the building industry, since the
armistice.
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