COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS EDWARD T. TAYLOR, Colorado, Chairman CLARENCE CANNON, Missouri J. BUELL SNYDER, Pennsylvania ROSS A. COLLINS, Mississippi JOHN TABER, New York RICHARD B.,WIGGLESWORTH, Massachusetts FRANCIS H. CASE, South Dakota HARRY P. BEAM, Illinois ALBERT THOMAS, Texas VINCENT F. HARRINGTON, Iowa MARCELLUS C. SHEILD, Clerk SUBCOMMITTEE ON NAVY DEPARTMENT Messrs. SCRUGHAM (chairman), CASEY, SHEPPARD, BEAM, THOMAS, DITTER, PLUMLEY, and NOBLE J. JOHNSON II ED S AT. 25 '41 AMERICA NAVY DEPARTMENT APPROPRIATION BILL FOR 1942 HEARINGS CONDUCTED BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE, MESSRS. JAMES G. SCRUGHAM (CHAIRMAN), JOSEPH E. CASEY, HARRY R. SHEPPARD, HARRY P. BEAM, ALBERT THOMAS, J. WILLIAM DITTER, CHARLES A. PLUMLEY, AND NOBLE J. JOHNSON, OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, IN CHARGE OF THE NAVY DEPARTMENT APPROPRIATION BILL FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1942, ON THE DAYS FOLLOWING, NAMELY: MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 1941. STATEMENTS OF HON. FRANK KNOX, SECRETARY OF THE NAVY; ADMIRAL HAROLD R. STARK, CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS; REAR ADMIRAL CHESTER W. NIMITZ, CHIEF, BUREAU OF NAVIGATION; REAR ADMIRAL BEN MOREELL, CHIEF, BUREAU OF YARDS AND DOCKS; AND CAPT. EZRA G. ALLEN, BUDGET OFFICER, NAVY DEPARTMENT Mr. SCRUGHAM. We are met this morning to begin consideration of the Navy's 1942 budget. The 1941 budget, as finally enacted, made available a total of $1,308,171,138 of cash and $182,741,612 of contractual authority, including $34,000,000 in both amounts, earmarked for emergency uses by the President. Subsequently, through other measures handled by the so-called deficiency subcommittee, there was made available $1,238,342,442.04 of cash and $640,254,000 of contractual authority. In other words, through supplemental measures the Navy got about one and one-quarter times as much as it received through the regular 1941 act. It seems to me, therefore, that we should have at the outset a statement of the main purposes being served by these supplemental grants, followed by a statement showing as to the major factors, the status of the Naval Establishment which is now functioning, and what is in course of development up to the point where the pending estimates enter the picture. We shall be glad to have you proceed now, Mr. Secretary? GENERAL STATEMENT Secretary KNOx. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, before discussing the Department's request for funds, I will set out briefly the background of the 1942 estimates. After the last World War and prior to the present one, our policy of enforcing the Monroe Doctrine, interpolated into terms of sea power, was to maintain a navy second to none. This policy, until December 31, 1936, was 1 affirmed by treaties to place the United States on a 5-5-3 ratio as to sea power with respect to Great Britain and Japan, and in heavy ships originally on a 5:1.67 with Italy and France. This policy was reaffirmed by the passage of the Vinson-Trammell Naval Expansion Act of 1934, which established the United States Navy at the revised treaty totals. After the expiration of the treaties in December 1936, competitive building among the sea powers started again. Subsequent to that date, three naval expansion acts have been passed to increase the sea power of the United States as follows: The two-ocean Navy authorized by the 70-percent act of July 19, 1940, will not be completed as to major units until 1946-47. The smaller craft will commence coming in in 1942-43. However, prior to the completion of this program which provides for a two-ocean Navy, we are confronted with two possible situations which may develop: 1. The defeat of Great Britain in the near future, leaving us to face the united strength of the Axis Powers on a two-ocean front. 2. The survival of Great Britain this winter with the commencement of a war of attrition, along with the possibility of Japan becoming an active participant as a belligerent in the Far East on the side of the Axis. It is obviously to our interest to prevent either of these possibilities from becoming realities as it is probable they would result in the United States becoming involved in a war. It is to prevent these possibilities from becoming realities that the present efforts of the administration are being directed. As a matter of fact, Congress is now debating the administration proposals of the lease-lend bill to support Great Britain by measures short of war. If it came to pass that Great Britain is defeated in the near future, our comparative naval strength with the Axis Powers in the fiscal years 1941, 1942, and 1943, is as indicated by the following table: Normal strengths, Jan. 1, 1941-Continued ESTIMATED COMPARATIVE STRENGTHS IN TYPES (DOES NOT INCLUDE FRANCE) NOTE.-France has as immediately effective units: 1 battleship, 1 aircraft carrier, 14 cruisers, 52 destroyers, 60 submarines. It is now reported that no new construction is contemplated. Such was the international political situation at the end of the last session and so it still remains today. The question arises as to what Congress did about the military situation in the last session. Well. you authorized and appropriated for a major expansion of the land and sea forces, and since last July the military departments have been trying to transpose these funds into terms of production and output of military armament and munitions, and, in the case of the Navy, in terms of ships, aircraft, pilots, ordnance, and munitions of all kinds. Progress, to my mind, while not as much as is desired, is all that could be expected-this despite our ingenuity, mass production knowledge, and manufacturing capacity. The reason is that it is difficult in 3 to 6 months to shift the country over from peacetime production to full-scale production of war materials. In 3 to 6 months it is hardly possible to catch up with the 3 to 5 years' start of the Axis Powers. However, I think that by the late summer and fall of this year we will be in full stride and we will gather impetus as the months go by. By fall we should be getting ready to produce as much munitions and aircraft as can be used by both Great Britain and ourselves, unless strikes delay production. I am glad you are holding a hearing to review last session's appropriations and the progress which the Navy has made on them because it will bring to your attention the major problems which we have been trying to solve, what we have done, and what still remains to be done. We want Congress to help us, and it is our purpose to tell you everything that we are doing. Our only request is that confidential information be kept from the record. Looking back over the year, the highlights, to me, have been: The excellent condition of the operating fleet including the fleet armament as I saw it at Honolulu. The rapid negotiation of the ship contracts and the manner in which this program is going forward. The rapid prosecution of the public works program including housing. The pilot-training activities at Pensacola, soon to be duplicated at Corpus Christi and supplemented at Jacksonville without loss of efficiency or reduction in the caliber of pilot material. |