PRESTIGE

of the SoldierBy MAJOR A. M. KAMP, JR.

HE MAN was wearing the uniformofa soldier. He

Mees cncarea about the bus terminal with no apparent

objective but to mingle with the people coming and

going, and to stand in front of the magazine and

newsstand, ogling the pictures of half-nude females.

Oceasionally, he would enter a room bearing a signover the door marked ‘‘Gentlemen.’’? Each time he

reappeared carrying a wire-net basket of soiled paper

handtowels, which he dumpedinto a large canvas bag

in the rearof the terminal.A smartly dressed soldier standing at the ticket

counter asked the agent, ‘‘Who is that character in

the soiled OD’s, with no hat, wandering aroundhere?

He’s a disgrace to the uniform and should be picked

up by the MP’s.”’ Theticket agent looked up, laughed,

andsaid, ‘‘He’s no soldier. He just cleans up aroundhere, and empties the trash cans. He was never inthe Armyinhis life.’’

Asearly as 1946, short months after millions of vet-erans returned to civilian life from fighting WorldWarII,street cleaners, trashmen, garbage collectors,and tramps began to appear dressed in parts of uni-forms,the typestill being worn byoursoldiers. Someof these individuals were veterans wearing out theirArmyclothing on the job. In manyother cases theuniforms were discarded by veterans to be picked upby some tramp or derelict who at once adopted thenew clothing as his Sunday-best.

Because Army clothing was inexpensive, easy toobtain, and most suitable for wear in the elements,anyone who spent a great deal of his time outdoorsmade it a point to visit the local surplus-sales storefor his clothing needs. Hunters, fishermen, construc-tion workers, and otherclasses of outside workers tookonthe appearance ofsoldiers equipped forfield duty.A farmer in Fairfax, Va., purchased complete uni-

forms for his hired help so that they would be com-fortably and warmly dressed to do the chores andother labors about his farm. One of the farm handswasarrested by the Armed Forces Police for not beingin proper uniform. He was released with an apologyafter it was ascertained that he was not a member ofthe Army.

Lieutenant George F. Corrigan, Adjutant of theArmed Forces Police in the Military District of Wash-ington, says, ‘Our men have a tough job. They areoften embarrassed andcriticized for Seemingly over-stepping their authority when civilians have been

32

mistakenly picked up as improperly dressed soldiers,

It is an awkwardsituation, and cannot be coped withunless there is a law passed to stop this business,’Tremendous stocks of surplus clothing and equip.

ment were dumpedontbe civilian market by the WarAssets Corporation for consumer, capital, and pro.ducer goods. The War Department announced inFebruary of 1946 that the Surplus Property Admin-istration had directed some $40,000,000 worth ofclothing and materials, which had been declared sur-

plus be turned over to the War Assets Corporation fdisposal in this way. §

Prisons and workhouses purchased great quantitiesof shoes, trousers, shirts, sweaters, and dungarees fortheir inmates at great savings. Road gangs from theseinstitutions seen repairing the highways took on theappearance of Army fatigue details under armedguard, which in many instances required explanationto irate citizens who witnessed suchscenes.Muchdiscredit has been heaped upon the Army as

a result of pictures of apprehended thugs or banditswearing some part of an Army uniform. The imme:diate conclusion of the publie is that another exsoldier has gone bad—the fault of the Army. Insult isSometimes added to injury when a local “badboy,”after being incarcerated for robbing somerich widow,1s pictured in an “‘Ike’? jacket and has never been il)the Army, but is identified as an ex-GI.

Police teletype lookout reports, of which there are*pproximately 100 per day received by police hquarters in the Washington area, indicate that oneof every eight descriptions of a male thug to be pieup deseribes him as wearing some item of an Arm)uniform—an implication that the individual was,1s, a soldier,

tempt shown the uniform,The uniform has taken onall the aspects of

THE QUARTER

ball. Modifications and changes have been kieked

around so much andforso long that a soldier develops

mental anguish whenever he must decide whether

or not to purchase a newone. His problem—how

much wearwill he get out of his newoutfit before a

change requires him to purchase another one.

After World WarII the Armyhad a problem. The

“Tke’? jacket was designedforfield wear, to be worn

beneath a field jacket. A blouse, similar in design to

those worn byofficers, was authorized but never was

manufactured. Therefore it became necessary to con-

sider ways and means of making the present uniform

moreattractive for general service and dress wear.

A series of War Departmentcirculars directed that

jackets be tailored to fit more snugly, and waistlines shortened to eliminate wrinkling. Chevrons,collar ornaments, service stripes, and decorations were

added, completing the dress-up plan.Although this program did tend to improve the

appearance of the uniform, an enlisted reservist who

came back on active duty for a short period as a mili-tary escort for returning war dead remarked, ‘*This

is all very fine, but no matter what youdoto this out-

fit, it’s still like trying to make a silk purse out of a

sow’s ear.”’

The reservist was not the only one whorealized thatmore than just a little tailoring and trimming was

required to improve the appearance of the soldier.In August of 1946 the Armystarted scrimmage again;

this time to kick around the idea of adopting a blue

uniform for all troops, which would replace the olive-drab service uniform for general service and dress.

The War Department began a survey throughout

the Army to learn what the individual soldier would

like in the way of a blue uniform. Six teams, of sixmen and two WAC’s each, were selected to model

several combinations of the proposed uniforms before

large groupsof soldiers stationed at posts all over the

world. A questionnaire was distributed during the

modeling sessions, and the soldiers made theirselections.

Before the program could be completed, the models

and their experimental uniforms were ordered home.

Because of large appropriation cuts the adoption ofnew uniforms for the Armyhad to be shelved. Rela-tively few soldiers were given the opportunity to viewthe new blues.

In the meantime the soldier had to be content withwearing his OD uniform, sharing it with bums, dere-

U.S. DEFENSE BONDSNow Even Better

34

Besides, the stock of “Tke»

jackets was still plentiful and hadto be used up,

4 After the Korean War began, the Department ad

the Army concluded that to raise the prestige of ¢

infantry soldier, something had to be done about nit

ing him alittle more outstanding Realizing thaig 1 was out of the question, a field goal

licts, and criminals.

touchdow1

attempted. > as :Another circular was distributed, announcing thaj

to the same old OD uniform could be added a lightblueseart, light-blue plastic dises as backingforeo]

ornaments and cap insignia, and light-blue brocadeq

shoulder cords. This attempt to improvethe appear.

ance of the uniform was not very enthusiastically re

ceived. i . =‘A Korean veteran being confronted with a sold

dressed in one of these new‘‘get-ups”’ said, ““Migawd

he looks like the doorman at the Waldorf Asto; a

dressed up in olive drab.”’ s

While the Korean conflict was at its peak, another

attempt was made by the Armyto adopt a complenew uniform, this time of gray-green color,

trimmed in gold. The entire 3rd Infantry Regimwas equipped with the new-look uniformsto test them:

for a period of one year. ;

Soldiers of the regiment apparently approvedof thuniform outside of the complaint that the mate

would not withstand normal wear. Onesoldier said“This outfit has that ‘Ike’ jacket beat a dozen diff

ent ways. Outside of wrinklin’ up fast and baggin’

the knees, it feels comfortable and looks good. Weg,

lots of compliments onit.”’

Althoughit appeared to be a stepinthe right dire

tion, particularly because it was a complete change

from the drab OD, plans to adopt it were cancelbecause the material did not wear well. However, Geral J. Lawton Collins, before he left the Departmof the Army as Chief of Staff, approved forafter regular duty hours, a dress blue uniformenlisted men. aaThe blue uniform will not be issued, but ean

purchased at the option of the individual. Man:listed menhave indicated approval of the new bbut few if any will wantto purchase oneat a eapproximately eighty dollars.A proposal to adopt a uniform similar in ¢

color to the officer semi-dress uniform forService wear by all personnel was studied reThe uniform if approved would have consistsorkereey blouse, and light-gray, or ‘‘pink”’the Proposal was disapproved and the foo!is ene again in progress, 3‘aeeeae of men who have en!

he Army since World War II andaee pe much of our uniformBrest on Re more uniforms will

considerabl y itee a soldi neand alias Joel otk uniform,Ing, is selected and maplace of the present drab OD’s.

(Continued on page 96)THE QUART!

RUFE,,,ENUE, N.Y. 18

PRESTIGE OF THE SOLDIER

(Continued from page 34)

Pemireretxtie soldier reflects on the Service as 4 ;

whole. During national emergencies he is held jp the ction

greatest esteem by the public and Congress. But When jgbroducl?”his country seemsto be out of crucial and immediate and peacetl

danger, and budgets must be trimmed, he becomes, untlesstarget for the knife wielders. i) 1

Since 1946 this has been one of the biggeststop. j thoroue

caps to the adoption of a new uniform for the Army, —Prestige and morale, the basis for building and main. h

taining a spirited, well-trained Army, have suffered Here are t

as a result, in addition to the fact that the Armyapparently has no exclusive rights to the wearing of RY

the uniform.Private Maurice Wisel, who lives in Arlington, Va

reported that, ‘‘I thought the Army took overthe

building of the underpass at Glebe Road and Arling-ton Boulevard. Several of the men working on theproject were wearing ‘Ike’ jackets, combat boots,and overseas caps. I saw one guy with the Seventh PERSONArmyshoulder patch on his sleeve.”’ (A new uniform of different style and color would ‘he handsome

tend to correct the misuse of the present one, because : A “best buy’troops would no longer wear the same itemsof cloth — *onomy. 4 (ing released to the public through surplussales. Hov- 983 cakesofever, this would be but a terporary peigite until such eetime as released servicemen either discarded the nev Iv

uniform or used it for gardening,fishing, hunting, 0 | ORYas workclothes. ithe onl

Debauchery of the uniform has becomeeasy. Exist «hj eesrai

@ «world

pein"

riginal ¢

fF large size cakPopular for t

ae laws require only that distinctive insignia be t ' M8 you wa

moved in order to change it from a uniform toaitem of clothing that can be worn by anyonenot col Vo RY

nected with the Army. The individual soldier dat 7ec using any part of his uniform for civilia” The fast fla}

—he would b ° . + Tats jforn = ingsregulations, e charged with violating wi "8S safely

cae law is clear, but what person can conclude that \

; ne dressed in an Army uniform without i ,

nee IS not a soldier when even our Armed Fores Youae are sometimes confused. g fam}

¥ ution of the problem would require the pass? Be :

a law, Settin 2 ‘

& forth additional restrictions ™Y to the civilian populace who pure

THE QUARTERMASTER review

would appl.

tbechanged. This i

There is . This is the crux of the enti

‘tniformeee more distinctiveeG

_ ‘ppearanceis foe. ar the coleman rs wholity other col nt. Dye it black, bro |

t afeae it no longer eoke like2 Sees a

Iestige of the ee to correct this situation ie

{ ‘pe Raeleeee aea be parallel to that of the

an wearin 2 read about in the newspa; ers—

g GI clothing arrested.”’ oe

*

| Bees ADVISES

ooh... ontiof The 5 ntinued from page 31)

tained_ uartermaster General

by trade associations or ot

; here are so many qualified inIndust

en. that selection 1S difficult for re

Tmasmuch as t

and

_

listings

her organiza-

dividualsin

asons

- ae nstxr