Stated concisely and with respect to the Marine Corps, the defects of the bill are twofold:

1. It affirms the existence of the Marine Corps without expressly stating the roles and missions which the corps is expected to perform. 2. It completely excludes the Marine Corps from participation in the joint bodies and agencies which the bill would establish.

In the balance of my statement, I shall elaborate upon these defects and attempt to convey to you their full import.

The failure of the bill to assign specific functions to the Marine Corps is a source of grave concern to me, for it allows the corps to be stripped of everything but name-to be reduced to a role of military impotence. I wish to dwell upon the position of extreme vulnerability in which the corps will be placed by enactment of the bill in its present form.

Unless a statutory statement of the missions of the Marine Corps is included, its functions become dependent solely upon the arbitrary judgment of the Secretary of National Defense. The size, the character, and the organization of the corps will lie in his hands. specialty which the Marine Corps has brought to a state of perfection can be summarily transferred to some other service.

A

Section 106 of the bill, which contains the sole mention of the Marines and which goes no further than to affirm the presence of a Marine Corps within the Department of the Navy, contains no guaranty that the corps will retain a single one of the characteristics it has today, with the one exception of its name. As a guaranty of vigorous Marine Corps existence, section 106 is completely without meaning unless it is accompanied by a statement of what the roles and missions of the Marine Corps shall be.

I believe that Congress and the people have a clear-cut idea as to the sort of Marine Corps they wish to maintain. I believe that they wish to maintain in the future as alert and useful a Marine Corps as they have known in the past one which serves aboard our ships of war and guards our naval stations-one which protects our national interests on foreign shores when danger threatens-above all, one which has developed amphibious warfare and which stands ready in substantial force to sail with the fleet to wage such warfare whenever and wherever the occasion arises.

There is only one way to insure that the Nation shall have this kind. of Marine Corps. That insurance that guaranty—is a plain and unmistakable legislative statement of exactly what Congress expects the Marines to do.

I regard it as highly appropriate, as well as urgently necessary, that Congress specify the functions of the Corps. To do so is no more than to state the reasons for its existence. When Congress calls the several armed services into being, it recognizes a specific need for each of the several components of national security. The very existence of each component is predicated upon a conclusion by Congress that a mission actually exists-that a role must be filled.

As specifically relates to the Marine Corps, Congress should ask itself whether the traditional need for an amphibious fighting force in being still exists-whether the need for a Marine Corps is in fact justified by the events of the past and forecasts of the future. If it determines the Marine Corps' function is still to exist, then it should

be set forth in law-otherwise the implicit will of Congress can be utterly, and legally, ignored.

The other defect of the bill, as it affects the Marine Corps, is one which has already attracted your attention, namely, that by the wording of certain sections (103, 112, and 202 (b)), Marine representatives are excluded from the joint bodies and agencies to be established or given statutory recognition by the bill. From the Joint Staff down to the Central Intelligence Agency, the participation of Marine officers. is not mentioned, and I am informed by my legal advisors that the terminology, "Officers of the Navy," as it appears in these sections, does not, regardless of the stated intentions of the framers of the bill, include officers of the Marine Corps. As the bill now stands, therefore, it operates to deny to these joint bodies the wealth of experience and unique knowledge of a corps which literally epitomizes joint operations.

* *

*

The Marine Corps has participated in joint operations throughout its entire existence. The joint doctrines of both the Army and the Navy today are in large part the results of the research, study, and thinking of Marine officers who, for 20 years prior to Pearl Harbor, devoted their conscientious and unceasing efforts to the formulation and perfection of the methods and techniques of amphibious warfare in joint operations. I ask that Marine officers be included in the several joint boards and agencies. I ask it because they have a distinct and substantial contribution to make in the field of interservice coordination, a contribution born of their experience.

I stated in my opening remarks, and I repeat in closing, that I am in accord with the objectives which this bill seeks to obtain. With respect to the Marine Corps, the necessary changes are few in number and simple in character--the insertion of a clear statement of the status and functions of the corps, and a slight rewording of certain sections to provide for Marine Corps representation in the appropriate joint bodies and agencies. I am prepared to submit draft amendments which will accomplish these changes.

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO H. R. 2319

In section 103 on page 4, line 18, after the word "Navy," insert the words "Marine Corps,".

In section 106 add the following subsections:

(b) Section 1616 of the Revised Statutes (34 U. S. C. 711) is hereby repealed. (c) There shall be maintained at all times within the naval service and under the supervision of the Secretary of the Navy the United States Marine Corps, including the Reserve components thereof, to perform the following functions and such additional duties and missions as directed by the President:

(1) To provide a balanced fleet marine force, including its supporting air component, for service with the fleet in the seizure or defense of advanced naval bases or for the conduct of such limited land operations as are essential to the prosecution of a naval campaign;

(2) To provide detachments and organizations for service on armed vessels of the Navy;

(3) To provide security detachments for protection of naval property at naval stations and bases;

(4) To provide forces for duty in the occupation of foreign territory or for other duty on shore when directed by the President;

(5) To continue to develop tactics, technique, and equipment relating to those phases of amphibious warfare pertaining to the landing force and the defense of naval bases.

In section 112 on page 14, line 6, after the word "Navy" insert the words "(including the United States Marine Corps)".

In section 202 (b) on page 20, line 21, and on page 21, line 1, after the words "Navy," insert the words "the United States Marine Corps,".

The CHAIRMAN. Do you want to start from where your statement ends?

General VANDEGRIFT. I would like to start from where that ends, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. All right.

General VANDEGRIFT. I have turned it in to the clerk and I think it will be filed.

Since submitting my statement to you, I have found that there has been some question as to just what the Marine Corps is and what its mission is and whether or not it is trying to be a second Army.

I can assure you we are not trying to be a second Army, so I thought I would like to read into the record just what we feel we should do and just what we feel we should not do.

In addition to its other duties, I feel that the Marine Corps should be organized to perform amphibious tasks such as the seizure of a beachhead or the capture and occupation of small island positions. and coastal areas.

Its organization should not be developed to meet the requirements of a protracted campaign in a large land mass nor should it include matériel therefor such as 240-millimeter howitzers, heavy engineer equipment, motor transport, and logistic lines for deep penetration into large land masses.

And so, Mr. Chairman, that we can get an exact definition of what the fleet marine force is and what it has been, I would like to read the definition of a fleet marine force into the record if I may.

The CHAIRMAN. Surely.

General VANDEGRIFT (reading):

A fleet marine force is a fleet type command of combined arms comprising land, air, and service elements of the United States Marine Corps which is integral with a United States fleet and is organized, trained, and equipped for the seizure or defense of advanced naval bases or for the conduct of limited amphibious or land operations essential to the prosecution of a naval campaign.

That comprises the rest of my statement, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you seen the testimony of Secretary Patterson?

General VANDEGRIFT. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And did you notice that in that there was incorporated some suggested amendments having to do with the Marine Corps?

General VANDEGRIFT. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And have you anything to say as to those amendments? You have them before you, do you?

General VANDEGRIFT. I have the amendments, if they are the same ones. They are the amendments I submitted with my statement.

That there shall be maintained at all times within the Naval Service and under the supervision of the Secretary of the Navy, the United States Marine Corps including the Reserve components thereof, to perform the following functions and such additional duties and missions as directed by the Presdient:

1. To provide a balanced fleet marine force, including its supporting air component, for service with the fleet in the seizure or defense of advanced naval bases,

or for the conduct of such limited land operations as are essential to the prosecution of a naval campaign.

sir.

Mr. DORN. May I ask the General whose amendments those were? General VANDEGRIFT. Those amendments were submitted by me,

Mr. DORN. That is what I thought. Not by the Secretary of War? General VANDEGRIFT. Not by the Secretary of War. They were introduced in the record during the Secretary of War's testimony.

2. To provide detachments and organizations for service on armed vessels of the Navy;

3. To provide security detachments for protection of naval property at naval stations and bases;

4. To provide forces for duty in the occupation of foreign territory or for other duty on shore when directed by the President;

5. To continue to develop tactics, technique, and equipment relating to those phases of amphibious warfare pertaining to the landing force and the defense of naval bases.

To answer your question, Mr. Chairman, these were submitted by me as my considered judgment of what is necessary to protect the Marine Corps in years to come.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, were those the same ones you found printed in the record?

General VANDEGRIFT. Yes, sir; the same ones.

The CHAIRMAN. They originated with you?

General VANDEGRIFT. Yes, sir.

If I might discuss these amendments one by one as we go down them, it might save some questioning.

I have just read into the record the definition of a balanced fleet marine force.

Now, this is nothing new in Marine Corps history. Since 1776, marines have been acting as the landing parties and the landing force of the Navy.

In fact, the two battalions that were organized-their first mission was to land in the Caribbean during the Revolution for the seizure of an arsenal which would now be called an ammunition dump.

As time went on, the forces changed and the missions changed. When we came to this present war, and even before the present war, we had the fleet marine force.

That force is an integral part of the fleet just as much as a destroyer outfit, a cruiser outfit, or a submarine outfit, and it is just as essential for the naval commander to have a ground force that is integral with his fleet to project his will ashore for the capture of a base that he needs, or to hold on to one for future use.

The second item in there is

To provide detachments and organizations for service on armed vessels of the Navy.

That is another mission of the Marine Corps we have been performing ever since we have been a corps.

That one section was already provided in the law as it stands today. 3. To provide security detachments for protection of naval property at naval stations and bases.

That is something we have been doing also ever since we have had a Marine Corps.

For the moment, if we skip four and come to five:

To continue to develop tactics, technique, and equipment relating to those phases of amphibious warfare pertaining to the landing force and the defense of naval bases.

We have been again, ever since colonial days, developing techiques and tactics for the defense and for the taking of naval bases. It is something we have always done.

I have heard a lot about flexibility and inflexibility and rigidity. I maintain that in carrying out the basic functions of the Marine Corps from 1776 until 1947, we have not hampered anyone in their functions, nor have we made the defense of America rigid or inflexible. The CHAIRMAN. Now, is it your contention that the bill as written would in anyway interfere with the functions of the marines as outlined by you now?

General VANDEGRIFT. There is nothing in the bill relative to the Marine Corps, Mr. Chairman, except to preserve its name.

The CHAIRMAN. You mean it gives it absent treatment?

General VANDEGRIFT. It just says nothing about it. But what it does do is that it creates a Secretary, and there have been so many different interpretations as to what this Secretary may or may not, or can or cannot, do, that I feel it is highly essential that this bill have a part that applies to the Marine Corps and that the functions and missions be made a part of the statutes so that there will be no question as to whether this Secretary may at some time give some of these missions to someone else.

I might say that the duties or functions of an Army or a Navy are practically immutable. No one doubts what the functions of the Army or Navy or even the Air Force are.

Another thing: they are the large outfits of this defense establish

ment.

But I do feel that in a marginal service such as mine and such as the Naval Air, it is necessary if we are to continue to serve--and we have served, I think, in a rather creditable manner that the basic functions should be written in.

Mr. WADSWORTH. Mr. Chairman, frankly, I would like to discuss with the General several of the things that are involved in his suggestions.

The CHAIRMAN. As he goes along?

Mr. WADSWORTH. I would prefer myself if he would finish his statement and then we could go into the discussion of some of the elements involved.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well.

General VANDEGRIFT. The only thing that I would like to say is this: That in testifying before the Senate committee, Admiral Nimitz was asked a question as to whether or not he objected to the basic functions of the Marine Corps being written into the law and he said he did not.

General Eisenhower was asked a question as to whether he had any objection to the basic functions of the Marine Corps being written in. He said he did not think it was necessary. I am not quoting his statement, but he said that he had no objection to those functions or any other basic functions being written in.

Now, to me, if the senior man in the military service, General Eisenhower, to whom you gentlemen of Congress and the President look