logical development which most certainly lies before us. So long as these machines overhang the market, just so long shall we freeze our technical deelopment at about its present point. In use these machines are an asset; out of use they are a threat. Since I am old-fashioned enough to believe that the law of supply and demand has not been repealed, my advice to our legislators would be not to monkey unduly with the buzz saw, for if we try to restrain this Frankenstein monster of a machine-tool program, it may break its bonds and destroy the industry which created it-the machine-tool industry, which is at the base of our Nation's industrial economy and its national defense. And my advice to you is to get this message across to your representatives in Congress before it is too late. VOLUME OF MACHINE TOOLS IN USE AT END OF 1943 NOT OVER 13 YEARS OLD $ 98,000,000. 11 TO 13 YEARS OLD 3 4 $1,250,000,000 2 3 4 BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OVERSEAS AUTOMOTIVE CLUB, New York, N. Y., May 24, 1944. AUTOMOTIVE SURPLUS DISPOSAL OVERSEAS After several meetings and lengthy discussions, this committee has reached sevaral conclusions on the disposition of automotive equipment in surplus overseas. These conclusions are appended herewith. It should be stated specifically that this report concerns itself with automotive parts and accessories and automotive service-maintenance equipment. The report was unanimously approved by the board of directors of the Overseas Automotive Club, at its meeting in New York on May 18, 1944. The Overseas Automotive Club, Surplus Disposal Committee: B. Asper, The Overseas Automotive Club recognizes that automotive supplies in surplus overseas will be located generally in two areas: (a) In liberated countries, or (b) in areas from which military operations were commenced or in which bases are established. Under (a) are such countries as France, Holland, Belgium, other countries of Europe, Philippines, Dutch East Indies, China, and others in the Far East. Under (b) the chief areas are such British Empire territories as England, Australia, New Zealand, and India, and the Near East, North Brazil, etc. Recommendations include: (1) That, insofar as possible, all surplus stocks of automotive property abroad be utilized in the liberated areas, since, however, much the surplus may be, it will far from restore to these countries the highway transportation that they had before the war. Surplus material should be freely distributed to these areas from any point at which they are held abroad. Motor transport and supplies provided to liberated areas may or may not be charged against American appropriations for United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration, as directed by proper authority. It should be specified that material turned over to official or private users in any liberated area may not be reexported to a third country. (2) That, insofar as possible, all automotive surplus remaining in the areas from which military operations have been commenced, or in which bases are located, should be disposed of to governments or other official agencies, such as postal, health, military, highway, etc. Provision should be made in contracts of disposal that the equipment should not be exported to any other country and that it must not be used by official agencies of the foreign government in competition with private enterprise. For example, such surplus transport equipment should not be made available to any governmentally owned aviation or steamship line competing with private American aviation or steamship lines. Also such transport equipment should not be permitted for use by governmentally owned railways on routes competing with privately owned transport facilities. Disposal contracts to government agencies overseas should provide that such transport material may not be resold to private users or reexported to third countries. (3) Surplus automotive stocks abroad remaining after the needs of (1) and (2) above have been filled should be offered first to the American maker, with a reasonable time being permitted in which the manufacturer might have his representatives or agents inspect the stock. If the American maker does not purchase the equipment it may then be offered for private sale but only under provision in disposal contracts that such supplies should not be reexported to a third country. (4) That lend-lease or military shipments of automotive equipment to foreign territories should cease immediately an armistice is signed in any war theater and that every effort should be made to utilize all surplus lend-lease and military transport equipment by our own armed forces abroad. (5) That military or lend-lease automotive supplies available as surplus in any military area abroad except as may be needed for relief and rehabilitation should be disposed of only at prices comparable to new open-market purchases. (6) That surplus automotive equipment abroad, which has become useless for further service should be so disposed of under (1), (2), and (3) above, or junked, that it cannot be cannibalized for parts to be sold to either official or private motor vehicle users. (7) That, preferably, any disposition to manufacturers of automotive surplus overseas should be by negotiated contract and in lots of such size that manufacturers, both small and large, may satisfactorily handle stocks offered to them. It is recognized by the Overseas Automotive Club that the chief disposal difficulties will be encountered not in the liberated countries but rather in the areas (England, Australia, New Zealand, Brazil, etc.) from which military operations commence or where bases are located. However, the surplus in these military areas may be greatly reduced by redistribution to areas requiring relief and rehabilitation or by the use of our own armed forces. The fact must be remembered that much of the automotive material and equipment that will be surplus overseas, will not be readily or economically useful in private operation, having been constructed under military rather than commercial requirements. This would indicate that much of it should be retained by our armed forces or sold to official agencies of our overseas allies, particularly the military, thus tending to reduce the difficulties. OVERSEAS AUTOMOTIVE CLUB THE TRUNDLE ENGINEERING CO., Hon. JAMES E. MURRAY, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR SENATOR MURRAY: Last week, while in Washington, I read in the Washington Post a short résumé of your talk before the New York Board of Trade. Being quite familiar with the plants constructed by the Engineering Division of the War Department, I heartily agree with your statement that these facilities can be subdivided and most of them put into use in the manufacture of civilian goods. It is going to take careful planning to get the best financial returns, and a sound sales plan to dispose of these subdivided units in an orderly way in cooperation with the business leaders in the communities in which the plants are located. In order that industries who are making post-war plans for expansion and new locations to consider these facilities, it is necessary that the Government decide now which of the plants are to be retained and which are to be sold, and then make known to industry which facilities are for sale in part or as a whole, so that industry may purchase them now with the understanding that they cannot have possession until the war is over. Industry cannot wait until the war is over to make plans. They must do it now. Most of the Government-owned facilities with which I am familiar will require some changes if they are to be used for civilian production. The purchaser of any of these facilities can make his lay-out, incorporating such changes as are necessary, with the result that when the buildings are available, and material and labor are available for the production of civilian goods, he will be ready to go forward without any delay. I have another thought in the matter of disposition of Government-owned facilities; that is that the selling price should be based on an accurate appraisal, taking into consideration a nominal depreciation per year based on the number of years the facilities have been in use. The purchaser should be permitted to buy these facilities on a small or no down payment, with monthly payments extending over 10 to 20 years. This would avoid the necessity of a manufacturer's refinancing for the purchase of the facilities and make available his present finances for working capital. It is my belief that the Government can get much better prices for these facilities if handled as suggested above. Yours sincerely, THE TRUNDLE ENGINEERING CO., JULY 7, 1944. ESSENTIALS FOR ECONOMIC DEMOBILIZATION Submitted to Senate War Contracts Subcommittee on Record of Senator James E. Murray, Chairman, by People's Lobby, Inc., Benjamin C. Marsh, Executive Secretary, Washington, D. C. The term "demobilization" is a misnomer. It implies a scattering of productive facilities, and hence of employment, and a return to the wasteful and uneconomic "competition," with which we entered |