Secretary STIMSON. Well, I know that all around me everybody has been doing as much as can be done, and I would rather not throw any bricks in any region which I do not know about.

Mrs. ROGERS. It seems to me, Mr. Secretary, there was a lack of coordination sometimes. And may I say here that I have found your officers, the men in the War Department, extremely courteous and extremely helpful whenever I have had occasion to go down there on questions of national defense.

Secretary STIMSON. I am very glad to hear that.

Mrs. ROGERS. But I feel they could go farther.

Mr. Secretary, you have stated that in 1917 France and England were the arsenals for the American Expeditionary Army. What about the weapons, such as rifles, pistols, machine guns, and material that we supplied our Army at that time?

Secretary STIMSON. We did not.

Mrs. ROGERS. And we also supplied a great many materials to France and Britain prior to our entry into the World War, did we not?

Secretary STIMSON. The equipment you referred to is of two types, and your question pertains to when we went into the war and prior thereto.

Great Britain came over here and France came over here and did buy a number of munitions; I do not know what types.

But I do know very well that when we went into the war, in spite of our efforts to make machine guns and to make rifles and to make artillery and to make airplanes that our Army-and I can speak for my regiment was almost wholly supplied with weapons that came, in our case, from France. Ours was an artillery regiment, and we used French soixante-quinze's and used French ammunition; and that was used in every regiment, practically. That was true in practically every artillery regiment of the American Expeditionary Force.

With regard to rifles, we did not use a great many. We had some Springfields, but in addition to that, we were obliged to get from Great Britain some of the Enfields and use those and their ammunition.

And so far as airplanes were concerned, we were tremendously unprepared at the beginning. We made great appropriations at the very beginning of our entry into the war; we were going to build Liberty engines and airplanes enough to darken the sky.

I know that all the planes that protected me when I was at the battle front were either British or French. And I am told-this is only hearsay on my part-I am told none of our planes got into action. But, prior to our entry, we were acting somewhat as an arsenal for Great Britain and France, to the extent that they bought from some of our private manufacturers, not from the Government.

Mrs. ROGERS. But they used our supplies.

Secretary STIMSON. From private manufacturers.

The CHAIRMAN. The chairman would like to state to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts that I do not want to have it appear that I am trying to prevent her from asking any questions or the Secretary from answering, but I do think that these questions, this line of questioning, is taking a great deal of time. If you want to pursue that course, let the lady go ahead and do it, but I do suggest that the lady confine herself particularly to the bill.

Mrs. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, that is what I am trying to do.

The CHAIRMAN. I am not objecting; you go right ahead and I am willing to sit here as long as anyone else, but it is going to take a great deal of time and get no information of value to the committee or anyone else. But if the gentlewoman from Massachusetts insists upon asking that line of questions I shall not say anything further unless objection

is made.

Secretary STIMSON. Mr. Chairman, in line with what Mrs. Rogers said about the delay in our present efforts at preparedness, the longer I stay here on this matter the greater the danger there is of further delay.

The CHAIRMAN. I was about to say the same thing.

Secretary STIMSON. Because I am very busy at this time.

The CHAIRMAN. The Secretary of the Navy was to have been the witness this morning and has been awaiting the call of the committee, and he is being delayed and delayed and cannot make any appointments. If, however, the gentlewoman from Massachusetts wants to proceed that way I do not want to interrupt unless objection is made. If objection is made the chairman will have to sustain the objection. Proceed, Mrs. Rogers.

Mrs. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Secretary, I should like to say in that connection that these questions are very vital, and I am asking these questions because I feel that had we been given enough informa tion in the past as to the lack of preparedness we could have been thoroughly prepared. I have voted, for one, for every defense measure that has come up.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will insist now on the regular order. Please kindly proceed, Mrs. Rogers.

Mrs. ROGERS. I do not want to keep the Secretary here any longer than necessary. One of the complaints is that our defense is weak, and I think we should know something about that, and I think this is the place to be asking the questions before we get into war.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is going to ask for unanimous consent of the committee that he be permitted to state what happened in executive session yesterday of the Foreign Affairs Committee with reference to the asking of questions, and the time of the members in asking questions. If there is no objection from any member the Chair would like to so state.

Mrs. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection?

Mrs. ROGERS. I shall object unless the Chair will permit me to make a statement

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection?

Mrs. ROGERS. I object.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, the Chair will have to let the objection stand. He has been accused of making a ruling when there is a positive agreement made by all members, and objection is made to my giving a statement of what happened in executive session.

Mrs. ROGERS. I am perfectly willing to have you state what happened if you will give me permission to say what I said when we made the agreement.

The CHAIRMAN. Will you proceed in regular order?

Mrs. ROGERS. Do you think, Mr. Secretary, that if the bill is passed by the Congress it will eventually lead our country into this war?

Secretary STIMSON. I do not.

Mrs. ROGERS. Do you believe that if the United States gives Great Britain unlimited credit that she will be asked sooner or later to send an army to England to assist her?

Secretary STIMSON. I have no knowledge whatever to answer such a question.

Mrs. ROGERS. Would you be willing to state your opinion?
Secretary STIMSON. No.

Mrs. ROGERS. The President has stated that manpower is not needed now. It is the "now" that makes his statement questionable.

Let us look, Mr. Secretary, at the facts for a moment. England has an Army, I am told of 2,000,000 men partially equipped. Germany has an Army of over 6,000,000, fully equipped. Great Britain cannot win the war without defeating Germany on land, as she was defeated in 1918.

Where do you think the manpower is coming from to accomplish this defeat?

Secretary STIMSON. I do not think that on that question-
Mr. JOHNSON (interposing). I object to the question.

The CHAIRMAN. The objection is sustained.

Mrs. ROGERS. Can England supply it?
Mr. JOHNSON. I object to the question.

Mrs. ROGERS. Can France supply it?

The CHAIRMAN. The objection is sustained.

Mr. TINKHAM. We have the Secretary of War before us.

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman, I insist on the regular order. Do you want to appeal from the decision of the Chair?

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair has sustained the objection.

Mr. TINKHAM. What is the use of appealing against a stacked committee?

The CHAIRMAN. It is not a stacked committee. The Chair again asks the committee to permit him to state what happened in executive session yesterday and then let the people decide whether it is a stacked committee or not.

Mrs. ROGERS. I object, unless you will give me permission to make a statement as to that agreement.

The CHAIRMAN. There is nothing to be coupled with the permission asked by the Chair, and the Chair will let the people determine for themselves

Mr. FISH (interposing). I will ask that we proceed in the regular order, Mr. Chairman.

The

The CHAIRMAN. This side is proceeding in the regular order. Democrats are proceeding in the regular order. The gentlewoman from Massachusetts will proceed in order.

Mrs. ROGERS. Mr. Secretary, does it not seem obvious to you that Great Britain will ask for our men eventually?

Secretary STIMSON. I have already answered that question, Mrs.

Rogers.

Mrs. ROGERS. Will you answer it again?

Mr. JOHNSON. I object.

Mrs. ROGERS. There is a great deal of confusion, Mr. Chairman. Mr. JOHNSON. He has already answered the question, he says.

Mrs. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I feel it is fair, in view of the confusion

The CHAIRMAN. The Secretary will kindly repeat his answer.
Mrs. ROGERS. If the chairman-

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is with you this time, if you will give him permission.

Mrs. ROGERS. I thank the Chair.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Secretary, will you kindly repeat your answer? Secretary STIMSON. I do not think so.

Mrs. ROGERS. Do you not believe that if we give England unlimited credit that the United States will have no other chance than to send an army when England requests it, under the rule that wherever the money goes the men follow?

Secretary STIMSON. I do not think so.

Mrs. ROGERS. Mr. Secretary, do you not believe that this is a war in a large part of machines?

Secretary STIMSON. Is that the question?

Mrs. ROGERS. Yes.

Secretary STIMSON. Yes; it is certainly a war in large part of machines.

Mrs. ROGERS. Do you support, Mr. Secretary, the creation of a corps status for our armored forces, our tanks?

us

Mr. JOHNSON. I object.

The CHAIRMAN. The objection is sustained.

Mrs. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, we have the Secretary of War before

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). That has nothing to do with it, with the legislation that is before us. If the Chair can be shown where in the bill there is anything that would justify such a question, I will be glad to allow it.

The Chair must appeal to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts to proceed in the regular order and ask questions that are pertinent to the bill.

Mrs. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, if you will allow me to complete this series of questions, on this matter, I can prove to you that they are pertinent. We have asked the Secretary of War here in the hope that he can give us information as to our national defense. This bill is for national defense, and for heaven's sake, Mr. Chairman, where are we going to get information as to national defense if not from the Secretary of State, and the Secretaries of War and Navy, and Mr. Knudsen,

The CHAIRMAN. You can get all the information from the Secretary you want at the proper time.

Mrs. ROGERS. I think this is the proper time when the Secretary of War is appearing before this committee.

Mr. JOHNSON. I ask for the regular order.

The CHAIRMAN. The question has been ruled out.

Mrs. ROGERS. Mr. Secretary, do you not think we ought to have a corps status for our armored force; for it to have the status of a corps, similar to the Air Corps, since tanks are such a vital factor in our national defense? It seems to me that we should have a tank corps.

Secretary STIMSON. No; I do not agree with you.

Mrs. ROGERS. It seems to me, Mr. Secretary, unless our tanks have a separate corps status like the Air Corps, this part of our defense program can never develop. Is that not true, Mr. Secretary?

Secretary STIMSON. I do not think so. I may tell you that I have personally inspected one or two divisions that thus far have been armored or mechanized, and found there the most progress of any branch I have had the privilege to see.

Mrs. ROGERS. Do you not feel, Mr. Secretary, that the manpower will be mowed down unless we have an essential, strong armored force? Unless it has a separate corps status, do you feel that it cannot be made a strong corps?

Secretary STIMSON. I am fully in favor-is that the question?
Mrs. ROGERS. That is the question.

Secretary STIMSON. I am very fully in favor of mechanization; that is what I think you mean by saying you want an armored corps. I am very much in favor of it.

Mrs. ROGERS. Of a separate corps status?

Secretary STIMSON. No, no. I am in favor of mechanization in the Army, but I think it would retard rather than accelerate its progress if it was taken out of the Army and made a separate organization.

Mrs. ROGERS. As a separate branch?

Secretary STIMSON. I think it would tend to dislocate the subsequent training of the Army.

Mrs. ROGERS. If France had had a separate armored corps, or England had been equipped in that line, certainly so many men would not have been mowed down. Is that not true?

Secretary STIMSON. No; and I have read very carefully the reports from the battlefield.

Germany has no separate corps.

Mrs. ROGERS. But it has been developed almost as if

Secretary STIMSON (interposing). It is being developed along very much the same line in this country that it has been developed in Germany.

Mrs. ROGERS. I know that Germany has a good many men in her parachute corps, a great many men in her air crops, and a huge mechanized or tank corps, and

Secretary STIMSON (interposing). That is a very different thing from an armored corps.

Mrs. ROGERS. Mr. Secretary, do you not feel that there is danger, if we send our ships and our armored equipment to Great Britain, that there is danger of her calling on us

Secretary STIMSON (interposing). Mrs. Rogers, I have already stated that in my opinion this bill would not convey any authority to do that. And I do not think it is necessary for me to answer that question on this bill.

Mrs. ROGERS. May I ask another question along that line.

Secretary STIMSON. You may ask as many questions as the chairman will let you, as far as I am concerned.

Mrs. ROGERS. I am glad, Mr. Secretary, you are on my side.