space for that month, and allocation which greatly reduced the amount available to Americans returning from Europe and increased that assigned to Canadian personnel. This was followed by a War Office announcement that the Queen Mary, the Queen Elizabeth, and the Aquitania would be devoted to the transportation of United States troops from British ports up to the end of 1945. The United States agreed to allocate 10 Victory-type and 2 other small troopships to the British in partial compensation.10 Early in October 1945 the Prime Minister informed the President that he would be unable to justify to the British public the further use of their biggest ships for United States troops repatriation unless an "equivalent lift" could be provided for British use. There was a difference of opinion as to what would constitute an equivalent lift, and General Gross stated that he would prefer to release the large British liners, which were available only for the North Atlantic, rather than give up the services of the number of smaller and more flexible ships which the British desired. The Joint Chiefs of Staff then agreed that only 1 of the 3 British vessels (the Queen Mary subsequently was designated) should continue in United States repatriation service and that the other 2 should be released. In December arrangements were made for further use of the westbound voyages of the Queen Mary until April 1946, primarily to carry British war brides of American soldiers and their children to the United States, and for the 10 United States Victory ships to continue in British service for a like period.11 The shipping attache of the British Embassy stated that it would be difficult if not impossible to determine accurately the cost of operating the "Queens" during the war for the following reasons: 12 1. The ships' companies' wages were paid for by direct appropriations from the British Admiralty and/or the Ministry of War Transport. 2. Supplies, maintenance, repairs furnished in the United Kingdom were, in some cases, charged against direct appropriations of the Admiralty and/or the Ministry of War Transport and, it is understood, in some cases, against reciprocal aid. 3. Supplies, maintenance, repairs furnished in the United States (except troop victualing expenses) were generally furnished under lend-lease. 4. The food for subsistence of United States Army personnel en route, eastbound, when furnished in the United States was charged against United States War Department appropriations. The subsistence of United States Army personnel en route, westbound, was, in part, charged against the United States War Department appropriations to the extent furnished by the United States Army and, in part was charged against reciprocal aid to the extent furnished by the United Kingdom. It appears from the records of the Treasury Department regarding arrangements by the United States and United Kingdom for the use of the "Queens" subsequent to September 2, 1945, that the British purely for accounting purposes set up an arbitrary charge of £20 ($80.70) per man. It appears reasonable to believe that this accounting rate is the basis for the reports so frequently heard that the United States paid the British approximately $100 per man while transporting United States personnel on the "Queens" during the war.13 Mr. Huntington Morse in a memorandum to Maritime Administration, Vice Adm. E. L. Cochran, dated June 30, 1952, stated that he had found a memorandum and confirmatory correspondence dated January 1946 with the British Merchant Shipping Mission, Washington, which indicated that the charge on the Queen Mary approximated $1,600,000 per month and that this was the estimated cost of operation of the 10 Victories which were made available to the United Kingdom.14 MEMORANDUM RELATIVE TO THE OPERATION OF THE "QUEENS" DURING WORLD WAR II-(a) NUMBER OF PERSONNEL CARRIED, AND (b) COST OF SUCH CARRIAGE There is set forth immediately below the statistics as furnished by the Army on the carriage of personnel on the North Atlantic. The figures do not include 10 Ibid. 11 The Transportation Corps, op. cit., p. 227. 12 Memorandum Relative to the Operation of the "Queens." (See enclosure (1).) 13 See enclosures 2, 3, and 4. 14 Operations of the "Queens" during World War II. (See enclosure (4).) one trip of the Queen Elizabeth from the east coast of the United States to the South Pacific: (a) Number of personnel carried: Grand total (938,201 Army). Total personnel (b) Cost of such carriage: The shipping attaché, British Embassy, states that it is difficult, if not impossible, to determine the "cost" of operating the “Queens" during the war for the following, among other, reasons: (1) The ships' companies' wages were paid for by direct appropriations from the British Admiralty and/or the Ministry of War Transport; (2) Supplies, maintenance, repairs furnished in the United Kingdom were, in some cases, charged against direct appropriations of the Admiralty and/or the Ministry of War Transport and, it is understood, in some cases, against reciprocal aid; (3) Supplies, maintenance, repairs furnished in the United States (except troop victualing expenses) were generally furnished under lend-lease; (4) The food for subsistence of United States Army personnel en route, eastbound, when furnished in the United States was charged against United States War Department appropriations. The subsistence of United States Army personnel en route, westbound, was, in part, charged against the United States War Department appropriations to the extent furnished by the United States Army and, in part was charged against reciprocal aid to the extent furnished by the United Kingdom. (Enclosure 2) OFFICE MEMORANDUM, UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT JUNE 30, 1952. To: 100. From: 102. Subject: Operation of the Queens during World War II. Supplementing memorandums of June 2, 1952, and March 24, 1949, in looking over British lend-lease and British general files, January 1945 through December 1947 (1B-66),1 I find a memorandum and confirmatory correspondence in January 1946 with the British merchant shipping mission here in Washington which deals with the offset arrangement between the United States and the United Kingdom mentioned in the fifth paragraph of my memorandum of June 2. This indicates quite clearly that at that time the charge on the Queen Mary approximated 1 Referred to as commissioners job 50-91. $1,600,000 per month and that our best estimate of the cost of operation of the 10 Victorys made available to the United Kingdom approximated the same figure. HUNTINGTON T. MORSE. MEMORANDUM OF MR. MORSE'S TELEPHONE CONVERSATION WITH MRS. PAYTON, TREASURY DEPARTMENT, (CODE 172, EXTENSION 2853) TODAY Mr. Morse told Mrs. Payton he was trying to run down some information on final arrangements made on the "Queens" for troop carriage and actual offset, i. e., what final settlement figures were. Further that he understood from Mr. Murphy in State that she had a memorandum of an arrangement which we made on the Queen Mary covering the period from September to December 31, 1945, perhaps extended to January. Mrs. Payton said she had a report from the British which Treasury used to record charges in their records on offset arrangements. She said the Queen Mary was engaged in carrying troops from November 5, 1942, to January 3, 1946. The statement she has is dated December 31, 1945, but includes the voyage of December 27, 1945, to January 3, 1946. Mr. Morse said that he was anxious to get two figures, as he recollected it, our arrangement for the continuance of the "Mary" after lend lease went off (September 1945 but extended for 60 days on shipping) talked about giving them a couple of French ships in addition to 10 Victorys blown up for troops. To this Mrs. Payton said that there was a footnote on the statement she referred to under the Queen Mary deducting from the total charges on this statement 45,996 personnel being subject to special arrangements between the Queen Mary and Marechal Joffre exchange. The number of personnel carried from November 11, 1945, to January 3, 1946, was 45,996 United States citizens. Mr. Morse said as he recollected it for accounting purposes about £20 per man or $80.70 was used. Mr. Morse said he had figures showing the carriage of 528,950 people for us by the Queen Mary. Mrs. Payton said her statement showed a summary of charges for services and supplies rendered United States forces from September 2, 1945, to December 31, 1945, listing two vessels, the Queen Elizabeth and Queen Mary, giving a breakdown of personnel by Army, Navy, Marine, Field Service, etc., totaling 133,743. Deducted personnel carried in Queen Mary from November 1, 1945, being subject to special arrangement, 45,996, leaving a total of 87,747, at £20 per head. Mr. Morse then asked Mrs. Payton if they had final settlement figures between United States and United Kingdom for the use of the "Queens," what was the actual offset figure and how as the settlement worked out. She replied that she had not come across it yet but would endeavor to obtain this information for him although it was like "looking for a needle in a haystack." Enclosure 4 To: 100. From: 102. JUNE 2, 1952. Subject: Operation of the "Queens" during World War II. Attached please find memorandum furnishing information on subject matter as of March 24, 1949. There follows additional pertinent information: The troop-carrying capacity of the two "Queens" (as originally converted for wartime uses) was: the "Elizabeth," 11,027; the "Mary," 10,595. However both of these vessels could and did carry, on special voyages, approximately 15,000 and this was so when they were employed for repatriation purposes. As the attached memorandum indicates, the employment of the "Queens" for the carriage of United States personnel was handled under lend-lease and reciprocal aid (reverse lend-lease) arrangements. There was no exchange of funds between the Governments on this shipping phase of lend lease. The termination date for lend lease between the United States and the United Kingdom was September 2, 1945. However, both the "Queens" continued to carry some United States personnel during the period between September 2 and December 31, 1945, and the employment of the Queen Mary for this purpose extended through the first part of January 1946. The total United States personnel carried by both the "Queens" between September 2, 1945, and January 1946 was 118,045. The arrangements made for the continued use of the "Queens" was done at the request of the United States military. The use of the Queen Mary between November 2, 1945, and January 1946, during which time she carried 45,996 United States personnel, was in accordance with a special "offset" arrangement between the United States and the United Kingdom by which the United States agreed, in consideration of the continued carriage of United States personnel by this vessel, to make available to the British the use of 10 Victory ships which had been converted to carry approximately 1,500 personnel per ship, and two French vessels, namely the Athos and the Marechal Joffre. Under this arrangement the British used the Victory ships for repatriation of Empire personnel to and from the Far East. There is no evidence that either of the French ships was used. I am advised that this special agreement worked out as a complete offset or washout and no charges or accounting under lend lease or otherwise were made. However, it appears from records now in the Treasury Department regarding the arrangements between the United States and the United Kingdom for the use of the Queens subsequent to September 2, 1945, that the British, purely for accounting purposes on the remaining 72,049 United States personnel carried by the Queens during this period (118,045 less 45,996 carried by the Queen Mary under the offset arrangement), set up an arbitrary charge of 20 pounds ($80.70) per man. It appears reasonable to believe that this accounting rate is the basis for the reports so frequently heard-that we paid the British approximately $100 per man for transporting our personnel on the Queens during the war. I have been unable to obtain any evidence, however, in support of a conclusion that this arbitrary charge set up for accounting purposes during the period subsequent to the termination of lend-lease arrangements was used for similar accounting purposes in connection with the overall settlement for the period lend-lease was in effect. In fact, the lend-lease and surplus property staff of State Department believe that it applied only to the period following the termination of lend-lease because the United States stopped making repairs, furnishing supplies and bunker oil to the Queens when the lend-lease arrangements were terminated. The information furnished in this memorandum has been obtained partly from our records, partly from conversations with representatives of the Treasury Department and of the lend-lease and surplus property staff of the State Department. I believe that it is reasonably accurate and, to a considerable degree, it conforms with my own recollection. I have been unable so far to obtain information of any pertinence with regard to the overall lend-lease settlement between the United States and the United Kingdom which would be of value with respect to the subject matter under discussion. Attachment. HUNTINGTON T. MORSE. (Enclosure 5) JULY 15, 1952. Memorandum for file. Subject: British Passenger Ships Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth Operations During World War II. In connection with a broadcast made by the Secretary of Commerce on July 2, 1952, an effort was made to determine the relative cost of transporting troops in the steamship United States, one of our war-built P-2 type troopers, and in the British "Queens." In connection with the Queens, it was clearly established that actual payments were not made but that American troops were carried in those vessels on a reverse lend-lease basis, estimated costs of which were ultimately set off in settling the lend-lease accounts. In all cases it has been assumed that subsistence for American troops was provided by the Army directly and estimated at an average figure of $1.50 per man per day. It also appears reasonably well agreed that the cost of operating the Queens in the transatlantic run as troopers, excluding passenger subsistence, ran approxi mately $1,600,000 per month per ship. At the maximum capacity of 15,000 troops the cost per man per voyage for transportation only, at a speed of about 30 knots, therefore is estimated at $53.30 (see note 1) assuming ship full one way, empty other. In the steamship United States, with a capacity of 14,000 men and an average cost of operation, excluding subsistence of passengers, as a trooper of $1 million per month, at a speed of 32 knots, cost per man per voyage would be $33.30 (see note 2). In the war-built P-2 troopers having a capacity of 5,250 troops and an average cost of operation of $295,000 per month, cost of transportation only, at a 20-knot speed, is estimated at $38.50 per man per passage (see note 3). The offset figure finally calculated for the Queens seems to be well established at £20 per man per transatlantic voyage or $80 on the basis of a 15-day round trip. E. L. COCHRANE, Maritime Administrator. NOTE 1.-2 voyages per month 15,000 30,000 men per month NOTE 3.-1.5 voyages5,250=7,675 men per month Mr. FILLMORE HYDE, $295,000 $38.50 per passage [Enclosure 6] AUGUST 5, 1952. New York University, Office of Publications and Printing, DEAR MR. HYDE: In your letter of July 8 you asked about the cost to the United States of transporting troops on the Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth. The following information has been furnished me by the Maritime Administration in the Department of Commerce and may prove helpful to you in answering your Canadian correspondent. During the buildup of American forces in Europe prior to the Normandy invasion, the British made the Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth available for transport of American troops on a general "reverse lend-lease" understanding. This country contributed much of the maintenance of the ships and provided subsistence for the embarked troops. Actual exchanges of funds or even of accountings, however, were not involved during this period. Toward the end of the war and in the demobilization period an effort was made at accounting so that offset charges could be set up in balancing the overall lendlease account between the two nations. I am advised that the offset figure for accounting purposes was taken at approximately £20 sterling per man. Since more than 1 million men were transported, the total offset charges were well up in the tens of millions of dollars. The figure of $100 per man was derived from using the old exchange rate of $4.80 per pound. Since exchange at the time was $4.03, a figure of $80 per man would be more nearly correct. Incidentally, may I compliment you on your Reader's Digest article. Sincerely yours, Maritime Administration, Rewritten: Henry Scharer 7/28/52. CHARLES SAWYER, cc: Administrative officer, signer's copy, Maritime Administrator, room 4842, general files, Maritime Administration, room 4067. Mailed August 5, 1952, by HS. |