General COLLINS. Well, as I recall the discussion on this, it was: We wanted to insure that those officers, the Inspector General and the Provost Marshal General, could come from any branch of the Army; and we did not want to set up any limitation on the fact that the Inspector General could be a line officer or an officer from any of the services.

Mr. KILDAY. Of course, he is only detailed. How about the others? General COLLINS. He is detailed.

Mr. KILDAY. The others are

General COLLINS. We have been to some extent a little bit illogical, I would say, with respect to the Provost Marshal General. We have set up a Corps of Military Police. But we wanted to be sure that the chief of that corps did not necessarily have to be a man whose duties throughout his career were as a member of the Corps of Military Police, because-and this was very largely General Bradley's thought; we discussed this with him when he was Chief of Staff, of course, as this bill was being formulated-we wanted to get away from any possibility that you had to have a man who had done nothing but military police duty, had to have him as the Provost Marshal General. It is something like the business of serving on General Staff duty. We do not want to set up, and we have not set up, a separate category of men permanently assigned to the General Staff Corps. We wanted these MP's to be soldiers. We wanted them to be people who had done all sorts of duties. Not only regulate, but be regulated, with respect to traffic and everything of that sort. That is what the thought was.

Similarly, we did not want the Inspector General to be a man who throughout his entire career had been doing nothing but investigating other people. We think it will give him a far broader appreciation and understanding of the responsibilities of the Army if we do not set it up in that manner. That was the basic thought behind this section.

Now, it may well be that I have not thought of all the answers, and with your permission I would like to have Colonel Baya again, who knows this bill in and out, give an explanation.

Mr. KILDAY. I want to say this off the record and maybe discuss it. (Statement off the record.)

Mr. KILDAY. You go ahead, Colonel.

Colonel BAYA. I think General Collins has stated about all of the considerations that went into it. As he has stated, General Bradley discussed this matter at some length in a conference.

The only other consideration that I remember being discussed, in addition to the ones that General Collins has mentioned, was that it was remarked that the Corps of Military Police is a new branch in the Army, and they would not want to be restricted to selecting the Provost Marshal General from among the people in this new branch, at least until it had developed to where they could be sure that it had in it an ample number of officers who were properly qualified for selection as the chief.

Mr. COLE. Is there any law that does restrict them to appointment out of that branch?

General COLLINS. The Officer Personnel Act has certain restrictions with respect to the appointment of the Chief of Services.

Mr. COLE. Well, the Military Police Corps isn't one of those specialist corps that is filled by people other than line people in the Army? It is not the same as the Medical Corps or the Chaplains Corps; is it?

General COLLINS. No, sir. We did not want to make it that way. Mr. COLE. I am not aware that there is anything in the law that would require you to do that with respect to the Military Police Corps. General Collins. You see, this is setting up the Military Police Corps for the first time. This is the first time in law that we are setting up a military police corps. This is a new corps in this bill. Mr. COLE. But, so far as this bill or existing law goes, this new corps is to be staffed by line people in the Army; isn't it?

General COLLINS. That is what our intention is; yes, sir.
You may have something to add to that-

Mr. COLE. Where is there anything in the situation that makes you apprehensive that you would be obligated to appoint as head of this corps somebody that had served in it constantly?

General COLLINS. I think maybe you could omit section 207, perhaps, without hurting anything. I think frankly what we were doing is really being aboveboard in putting it in the bill and not having, even by similarity with respect to the other corps, any restrictions on who might be put in as Inspector General or Provost Marshal General. But I ask Colonel Baya again to elaborate on my answer there.

Colonel BAYA. Sir, in section 206, it prescribes that the officers named in that section shall be selected and appointed as prescribed in section 513 of the Officer Personnel Act. In the Officer Personal Act, at the time that bill was under discussion before this committee, the Department had recommended that all of these chiefs of branches be general officers detailed to those positions, rather than be officers appointed by the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, in accordance with the old rules that had previously existed. After considerable discussion the committee wrote in section 513 of the Officer Personnel Act, which prescribes that the chiefs of branches shall be appointed by the President and that in selecting the chiefs of branches the selection board shall consider officers of the branch concerned and may consider other officers who have had extended experience on similar duty. So, in selecting a chief of branch, you can go outside of the branch only if you find an officer who has had extended experience on duty similar to the duties that are normally performed by the branch. And because section 513 of the Officer Personnel Act says that the chiefs of branches shall be appointed in that manner, the Provost Marshal General is not one of the ones listed in section 206, but he is provided for separately in section 207.

Mr. COLE. Why couldn't you have accomplished the same thing by putting those two officers, the Inspector General and the Provost Marshal General, creating them as basic branches, in section 306?

Colonel BAYA. The Military Police Corps is created as a basic branch in section 306. The method of the appointment of chiefs of branches under section 513 of the Officer Personnel Act is not necessarily connected with section 306. Section 513 of the Officer Personnel Act simply prescribes the rules for the selection and appointment of a person to an office created by the Congress.

Mr. COLE. The Inspector General and the Provost Marshal General are not created under section 306 as one of the basic branches?

Colonel BAYA. The Military Police Corps is, sir, but there is no Inspector General's Corps in this bill.

Mr. COLE. Why shouldn't the Inspector General's Corps be set up as a basic branch?

Colonel BAYA. As the term "branch" is used in this bill, it has the connotation of being a career branch. A lieutenant when he comes into the Army chooses his specialty. It is a field of specialization that he follows throughout his Army career.

Mr. COLE. In the artillery?

Colonel BAYA. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLE. He is going to stay in artillery all his life, or in the Signal Corps all his life.

Colonel BAYA. Yes, sir; until he gets to the top grades. When you get to the general officer grades, that is not true.

Mr. KILDAY. Of course up until the time of the Officer Personnel Act, he was actually nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate in his branch; isn't that right?

Colonel BAYA. That is right.

General COLLINS. There is a decided difference between the legislation that has applied in the past to the Army and the legislation that has applied to the Navy, Mr. Cole. Until relatively recently, you were not commissioned in the Army; you were commissioned in the Infantry, Artillery, or some other branch. That is one thing we want to get away from.

Mr. KILDAY. Prior to that an officer was commissioned in a certain regiment.

General COLLINS. That is right.

Mr. COLE. Then, what you want to get away from is the form of being commissioned in a special branch, as far as designation by commission is concerned, but actually, in substance, he is a specialist as he always has been.

General COLLINS. He is a specialist up to a certain point. But we can broaden our instruction and broaden our assignments more than we could in the past. I think we ought to have that authority. In other words, I, for one, believe you are always going to have a need for specialists; there isn't any doubt in the world about it, but you ought to have more interchange of officers between Infantry, Artillery, and Armor. Actually, while the term "Armor" is used here in place of Cavalry, the Armor includes artillerymen, infantrymen, and excavalrymen.

Mr. BLANDFORD. Mr. Chairman, may I raise a question?

Mr. KILDAY. Mr. Blandford.

Mr. BLANDFORD. General would you have any objection to adding the words "or brigadier general" after the words "major general" in line 24 in section 206, page 46, to bring that section in line with section 513 of the Officer Personnel Act, which states that: "Each of the offices of chiefs of branches, arms, or services, and each of the offices of their assistants as provided by law, respectively, shall be filled by the President appointing, etc.," and then it goes on to say "Upon the appointment of a Regular Army officer to any such office, he shall at the same time * * * be permanently appointed in the grade of major general or brigadier general in the Regular Army, whichever is the rank specified for such office.

General COLLINS. I would like to ask Colonel Baya to answer that, because Colonel Baya worked intimately in the development of the Officer Personnel Act with the committees of Congress and frankly is far better qualified to answer these detailed questions than I am. Colonel BAYA. The term "brigadier general" in section 513 of the Officer Personnel Act applies to the assistant chiefs and not to the chiefs. All of the chiefs by existing law are major generals and have been for a number of years. In section 513 of the Officer Personnel Act, where you were reading, it say "the offices of chiefs and the offices of assistant chiefs."

Mr. BLANDFORD. That is right.

Colonel BAYA. The grade brigadier general applies only to the assistant chiefs. The grade major general applies to the chiefs.

Mr. BLANDFORD. Does the Officer Personnel Act make all of these chiefs major generals?

Colonel BAYA. It did not change existing laws. It merely changed the method by which they would be selected. Existing law had already prescribed that they be major generals, and that was not changed by section 513 of the Officer Personnel Act.

Mr. KILDAY. Does he have to be a major general to be appointed or does he become a major general when he is appointed?

Colonel BAYA. If he is not already one, he becomes a major general when he is appointed.

Mr. KILDAY. Becomes a permanent major general?

Colonel BAYA. That is correct.

Mr. BLANDFORD. My only point is: You are repealing the law which sets up the ranks for each of these chiefs. And then you are restating the law that they may be major generals.

Mr. KILDAY. Shall be major generals.

Mr. BLANDFORD. Shall be; yes. Now there would be nothing inconsistent, since you are repealing this law, for this committee to add the words "or brigadier general" in there to fit in with section 513 of the Officer Personnel Act, if you want to do it. Even though 513 talks about assistant chiefs, it also talks about chiefs.

General COLLINS. We have another section in the bill here that does discuss the assistant chiefs.

Mr. BLANDFORD. Yes, sir.

General COLLINS. Frankly, my answer to that, if I could interject myself for a moment, would be that I strongly desire to have it this way. These men, each of them, is in an office of great responsibility and he ought to be a major general in my judgment.

Mr. BLANDFORD. The only reason I mentioned it, General: You are creating an office, but at any moment everything below this office of chief of a branch can be cut off.

General COLLINS. I would still prefer to see this specifically cover the fact that the Chief, or one of the occupants of these offices, be a major general.

Mr. KILDAY. Or must be a major general?

General COLLINS. Yes, sir.

Mr. BLANDFORD. The only thing I had in mind, Mr. Chairman, is that you might be building up someday to the elimination of one of these branches. You very probably are building up to the elimination of one of these branches.

General COLLINS. Might.

Mr. BLANDFORD. You are going to keep a branch for the time being. You appoint a chief and make him a major general for a branch that you are going to abolish next year. If you could make that officer a brigadier general and not be required to make him a major general, the transition might be a lot easier for the Army.

General COLLINS. I think that is a matter of internal organization which can easily be handled.

Mr. KILDAY. Of course you are going to be under the ceiling of general officers, so you dare not waste one.

General COLLINS. Not one.

Mr. KILDAY. You haven't any to waste.
General COLLINS. No.

Mr. KILDAY. The House is ready to go into session.

Is there a meeting of the full committee tomorrow?

Mr. BLANDFORD. I don't believe so.

Mr. KILDAY. Then, we will resume tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock. (Whereupon, at 11:53 a. m., the subcommittee adjourned to re-convene at 10 a. m., Tuesday, March 7, 1950.)