Senator DOUGLAS. That is right.

Senator LONG. Technically they are not under the Marine Corps; is that right?

Senator DOUGLAS. That is right, but they are under the command of the commanding general of the division. They are included in the figures of strength which I give.

Now I think you will find that for each 18,900-man division the Army must have 75,000 men. Adjusting this figure to take into account the fact that the Marine division is 18 percent larger, it is apparent that the Army would require a total of 75,000 plus 18 percent, or 88,500, to put the equivalent of a Marine division in the field.

Senator LONG. Why is that necessary that the Army have that many men in addition? Are those figures undisputed?

Senator DOUGLAS. I think they will not be substantially disputed. We can check them.

Senator LONG. What are all the men for, supply corps, personnel services?

Senator DOUGLAS. Supply Corps, Ordnance, headquarters units, and so forth, attached to the corps. I don't know whether-corps troops would not be regarded as part of the Army combat forces, not at least on the divisional level.

Senator LONG. That is an amazing number, to have 75,000 in addition to the 18,000.

Senator DOUGLAS. No; that is a total of 75,000.

Senator LONG. They have to have 75,000 in order to have 18,000 in the front line?

Senator DOUGLAS. That is right. I think General Marshall has said the great weakness of the Army is the overhead which it has in supply and service troops.

Now, as I say, the Army would require a total of 88,500 men to put the equivalent of a Marine division, which is 22,300, in the field; but each Marine division is supported by a Marine air wing of three groups. The Air Force wing consists of only one combat air group and its base. To provide the same support that the three-group Marine air wing provides to a division three Air Force wings totaling 15,000 men in the theater of operations must be added to the 88,500 men the Army requires.

The total Army and Air Force strength, therefore, the Army and Air Force strength required to field the equivalent of a Marine division, with its accompanying air wing, is therefore 103,500 men.

This memorandum I have was prepared some time back when the Marine Corps had a strength of 166,000. That provided two divisions and two air wings of three groups each.

From this figure we must subtract 14,000 men serving with the Navy as security forces and ship's detachments, since the Army performs no comparable functions.

We must subtract also something over 10,000 men, who are in aviation but not in the operating forces, leaving a total of 141,000 men, which divided by two Marine divisions, gives a figure of 70,500 men per Marine division.

I want to point out that this figure is 32 percent less than the 103,500 men required by the Army and Air Force to field an equivalent airground team.

Even if we do not make these additions and take the entire Marine Corps as at the time I prepared that memorandum, 166,000, we would have a division slice of only 83,000 as compared to the Army figure of 103,000, or 19 percent less.

Senator SALTONSTALL. Those are comparable figures on Red Cross, stretcher bearers, and

Senator DOUGLAS. It doesn't include Red Cross.

Senator SALTONSTALL. Cooking and everything?
Senator DOUGLAS. Yes, sir.

Senator SALTONSTALL. Everything that goes up. As far as you can make out as an intelligent man————

Senator DOUGLAS. Allegedly intelligent.

Senator SALTONSTALL. Those are absolutely comparable?

Senator KEFAUVER. Let the record show Senator Douglas is an intelligent man.

Senator SALTONSTALL. Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

Senator DOUGLAS. I think this indicates, outside of the combat divisions, the Marine Corps has less fat and less overhead.

Now let's take the situation inside a combat division, indicated by these tables of organization.

For instance, look at the M-1 rifleman, who, after all, bears the brunt of an attack and takes the brunt of the casualties. An Army division has 6,913 men carrying an M-1 rifle. The Marine division has 8,748, or 1,835 more men.

Now it is true that a Marine division is 18 percent larger than the Army division, but if my arithmetic is correct, we have 27 percent more riflemen.

Now, even if you take carbines-and the boys with carbines generally are not as much up in the front ranks as the men with the M-1'swe furnish 9,470 men with carbines compared to the Army with 7,474, or about 2,000 more men with carbines. The Marine division has 903 Browning automatic rifles compared with 412 in an Army division and 98 submachine guns whereas the Army has none.

Now let's take the light machine gun. We have 575 caliber .30 Browning light machine guns, as compared with the Army figure of 160, or 31⁄2 times as many light machine guns.

Now, it is true they have a few more caliber .50 machine guns. I think however that you will find those are primarily used in the antiaircraft battalion attached to an Army division. The .50 caliber gun, of course, is of little or no use in an attack, and in modern warfare it is not of such great use in defense.

We have more flame throwers. We have 111 portable flame throwers, while there are no flame throwers in an Army division.

Look at our tanks. We have nine flame-thrower tanks as compared to no flame thrower tanks in the Army.

Where then does the Army personnel go? I would like to have you look at transportation figures.

}

We have down a total of 2,409 self-propelled vehicles, excluding artillery, of course, compared to 3,800 in the Army. They have 1,400 more jeeps, trucks, and so forth, than we have.

Well, those vehicles require drivers; so you will find the motor transport elements and service elements much larger; in the percentage of

riflemen much less in the Army division than in the Marine division. This distribution may be adapted to European warfare, where you have highways, but it certainly doesn't function in rough ground, which is particularly true of Korea, and which will be particularly true of cases where police action is needed.

So we want to submit that the Marine Corps gets much more fire power out of a hundred thousand men than the Army. I say that without disparagement to the Army.

Senator LONG. The more vehicles you have the more you need roads. Senator DOUGLAS. I don't think we marines get as much fire power as we should, because I was adjutant of our division, and the only battalion in our division which was over strength was headquarters battalion. We are not a hundred percent perfect, but I do say we strain toward the goal much more closely than our sister service.

Senator LONG. It goes without saying the more vehicles you have the more highways you need and the more fuel and equipment you need to keep the vehicles going.

Senator DOUGLAS. Yes. This may be an ungracious thing to say, but I think you will find the Army is somewhat road-bound. I will not say muscle-bound, but road-bound. We are much more mobile. Now, Mr. Chairman, I have worked out some figures on costs. That is a difficult thing to measure, but I think it is accurate.

I would like to submit them for the record.

Taken as of 1939 and 1948, we have included and charged to the Marine Corps hospital costs and other services normally furnished by the Navy. So we tried to be as inclusive as we can be.

We find that in 1948 the average cost per enlisted man in the Marine Corps was $4,300. The average cost per man in the Army was $5,900.

I will submit those tables in detail. So that we say that the taxpayer gets more from the Marine Corps per dollar spent. He not only gets more firepower out of each 100,000 men, but each man of that 100,000 cost the taxpayer appreciably less, according to my figures, nearly 30 percent less.

Senator SALTONSTALL. Mr. Chairman, isn't the answer to that, or isn't an answer to that, that the Army has included in its figures, using that word again, the whole division slice?

Senator DOUGLAS. No.

Senator SALTONSTALL. Whereas, in the Marine Corps the Navy is carrying part of that burden.

Senator DOUGLAS. We use as our divisor the total number of men in the Marine Corps and our costs take in our overhead as well. We included the medical and hospital, we included signal, engineers, ordnance, chemical service. We included air service. So thatSenator SALTONSTALL. Quartermaster?

Senator DOUGLAS. Yes.

Senator SALTONSTALL. Clothing and all?

Senator DOUGLAS. Clothing and equipment, and not merely the items purchased by the Marine Corps, but also cost of items furnished to the Marine Corps, whether purchased by the Marine Corps or not. I will submit this table for the record.

Senator KEFAUVER. Is that a table that can be put in the record? Senator DOUGLAS. I do not think it is classified.

Senator KEFAUVER. It is not classified?

Senator DOUGLAS. I do not think it is classified.

Senator SALTONSTALL. I say most respectfully, from listening up in this committee, I don't know whether the committee members will agree with me, but those figures are so far apart as to make it awfully hard for me to believe them.

Senator DOUGLAS. If there are errors in the figures, I want them pointed out. My intention is to get comparable figures.

Senator KEFAUVER. Let the table be made a part of the record at this point.

(The table referred to above is as follows:)

Comparison of average costs per military person during fiscal years 1939 and 1948