The Bridgeport times and evening farmer., 1922-06-02
Military Leaders Opposed To Reduction Of U. s. Army

1 opnent of the national defense sys- | tenn sanctioned by the National De- 1 fense Act" he said The entire fssas 9pan The The ss 1s | eult we have in our country. trained | in the service before the war, with | the added experience of service dur ing the war, and with the fullest ap- ments, is unanimous in the belief that we should not reduce our regular | forces below 15o,000 men,
 General Pershing takes an ex- tremely serious view of the situation. | "A careful consideration of the work in hand" said he, If the ini- tial well-laid scheme is not to be sert- 1ously curtailed Is not to be seriously ties abandoned. leads inevitably to the conclusion that any further reduc- ton would be disastrous"
 General James G. Harbord, who as General Pershing's chief executive of- ficer speaks as a technical expert on the effects of the House bill, said: 'I believe the appropriation as passed by the House of Representa- tlVes Is dangerously small and 1na- perils the national defense, parttcu- larly striking at the national guard, the organized reserves. the Reserve Officers Training Corps and the Civil- ian Military Training camps and so reduces the regular establishment
  fense Act cannot be carried out"
 Pointing out that the mission of the regular army has been unchanged since -he National Defense Act was passed in 1920, the General called at- teEtion to the fact that the force has in that time dwindled from 2s0,0o0 to 150.000 men.
 Tt simply cannot do the work with less" he declared. "Something must give way. either the training or the citizen soldier, which we regard as our principal business. or the coast defenses and ordinary work of the strikes and other emergencies. There is a minimum limit below which you cannot go with safety"
 The Air Service. General Harbord said, can hardly be efficient below 15, 900 men; the cavalry and field ar ti1lery cannot safely. be diminished. Comparing the strength of the pre- war army with it's present strength,
 Air Service Strength.
 ''Then we had 65 regiments of in fantry and now we have 38; then 25 cavalry regiments, and now 14; then now IS; but of course we have an air service, chemical warfare service. tanks. motor transport, and many new units which are necessary under our mission. but reduce the strength of the fighting units of the line"
 Perhaps the greatest apprehension is felt by those who are most inter ested in the training of the national guard, the citizens reserve and the organized reserve. Major-General George c. Richards, chief of the Mi litia Bureau, is especially worried on this score. Said he:
 Under tue House bill not only would we have to suspend our plans for army and corps units, but we also would have to withdraw recognition from units already organized, for the simple reason that we will have no money to obtain them. We shall have al matters now stand, to suspend the organization of coast artillery units, cavalry commands, heavy or motor ized artillery, most of the air force, large and important engineering units, as well as other units essential to the proper organization of any army or corps.