U.S. Army Medical Department, Office of Medical History
Skip Navigation, go to content

HISTORY OF THE OFFICE OF MEDICAL HISTORY

AMEDD BIOGRAPHIES

AMEDD CORPS HISTORY

BOOKS AND DOCUMENTS

HISTORICAL ART WORK & IMAGES

MEDICAL MEMOIRS

AMEDD MEDAL OF HONOR RECIPIENTS External Link, Opens in New Window

ORGANIZATIONAL HISTORIES

THE SURGEONS GENERAL

ANNUAL REPORTS OF THE SURGEON GENERAL

AMEDD UNIT PATCHES AND LINEAGE

THE AMEDD HISTORIAN NEWSLETTER

Chapter XXII

Books and Documents > Medical Department of the U.S. Army in the World War, Volume III, Finance & Supply

CHAPTER XXII

THE AMBULANCE BODY

MODEL B

The United States standard closed motor ambulance, body model B, 1917, was mounted upon a ¾-ton standard chassis. The body was inclosed front, sides, and top, and carried a canvas curtain, a tail gate, and a step at the rear.

The capacity of the ambulance, in addition to driver and orderly riding on the front seat, was 8 patients sitting, or 4 recumbent on litters, or 4 patients sitting and 2 recumbent.

The ambulance was fitted with two hinged upholstered seats, which, when not used as such, were folded over into the center of the body to form a deck upon which the lower litters were carried. Each of the upper litters was carried at the front end in two spring-supported strap carriers, and at the rear by one spring-supported strap and one spring-supported hook, swiveled upon the rear center post. These general features, together with certain improvements referred to at greater length below, constituted model B.

The ambulance bodies built for the Government in 1916 represented the best design submitted to the ambulance board at the time of their purchase. They were not without defects, however, and the board continued its investigations. Early in January, 1917, there were submitted to the board by a representative of the H. H. Babcock Co., of Watertown, N. Y., manufacturers of commercial truck and delivery bodies, photographs and specifications of a sample ambulance body constructed by that company.1 The description of this body indicated that it had sufficient merits to justify its purchase. After an examination and tests of the body the board was thoroughly convinced that it represented the best type of construction for ambulance bodies which could be secured and was far superior to any design offered up to that time.1 It surpassed all other designs in strength, rigidity, lightness, ease of repair, simplicity of construction, and qualities of material and workmanship. The company agreed to make any minor changes the Government might require. On the request of the Surgeon General and representation of the difficulties incident to the procurement of such bodies, authority for the purchase of 500 was granted by the Secretary of War, March 7, 1917.1 A contract, accordingly, was made with the H. H. Babcock Co., March 13, 1917, for 500 ambulance bodies at $330, in which the contractor undertook to store the bodies until needed by the Government and to deliver 100 within 70 days and 100 per month thereafter until the contract was completed.2 Deliveries were made, 8 in May, 174 in June, 61 in July, 205 in August, and 52 in September.2

During the life of this contract no inspector or other representative of the Medical Department was stationed at the Babcock plant. Inspections were


352

made by members of the ambulance board ordered to Watertown, N. Y., for that purpose as the work progressed and the contractor requested. The first of these inspections was made April 30 and May 1, 1917. At that time all the material required to fill the contract was on hand or en route. The material in the rough and 24 bodies in process of construction were inspected. The work was done by skilled workmen in a high-class manner. The plant covered 12 ½ acres, was provided with its own water power, and had a force of 500 employees, which could be increased if necessary.3

FIG.18.-G.M.C. ambulance, model '16, open type 

The plant was prepared to complete 10 bodies per day, which could be increased to 20 per day with little difficulty. If needed the output could be increased to 30 per day by discontinuing commercial business. The contractor proposed to have spare parts of the bodies numbered and catalogued so that any part could be replaced if required.3 Subsequent inspections were made in the same manner. A permanent inspector was sent from the Surgeon General’s Office to the factory in the latter part of September, 1917, and remained there until the contracts of the Babcock Co. with the Medical Department had been completed.4

Another contract with the Babcock Co. was entered into June 13, 1917, for 2,308 standard ambulance bodies and 192 spare parts or repair bodies.5 The price to be paid for these bodies was $352.50 completely assembled and painted, $332.50 unassembled and primed but not painted, and $340 unassembled, primed, and crated for export. This contract called for the delivery of 1,000 bodies by September 1, 1917, and the balance by November 15, 1917. However, only 235


353

bodies were delivered by September 1, and the contract was not fully completed until May 11, 1918.5 This delay caused no inconvenience except for a short time for spare parts bodies. At no time during the life of this contract was there an actual shortage of bodies.

A number of changes were made in the body and its appurtances after it was approved. These were covered by supplemental contracts. They included litter trolleys, Vehisote panels for sides and front to inclose the body, storm aprons, and various minor changes.5 The total added cost of these changes amounted to $55.92 on the bodies on which they were made.

FIG. 19.- G.M.C. ambulance, model '16, closed type.

IMPROVEMENTS

TROLLEY DEVICE FOR UPPER LITTERS

The animal-drawn ambulance had been in use so long and had been improved so often that the body of that vehicle may be said to have reached its ultimate developement by 1917. It was but natural that all the better features of this ambulance body should be incorporated in the one now planned. The spring hangers for the upper litters, having proved a great comfort for patients, were continued in the motor vehicles. But, in loading the upper berths of the animal-drawn ambulance it had been necessary for one man to climb into the ambulance and place the front handles of the litter in the hangers. These hangers were attached, one to the bow and the other to the center post, front and rear. Even in the open (curtained) type of motor ambulance body this was a slow and inconvenient procedure. In the closed type it was impracticable. These difficulties led to the development of trolleys on which the


354

front hangers could run to the rear and back. The bars for these trolleys or tracks at first were placed horizontal; but later were so placed that the rear end was somewhat lower than the front. This arrangement permitted the hanger to gravitate to the rear, when not in use, where it would always be ready for loading. This slope of the trolley bar brought the line of thrust, in pushing the litter forward, more nearly parallel with the track. It resulted in less friction and in greater ease in loading. An entirely suitable trolley-carrying device for the front hangers was finally developed. Metal hoops were placed on the front central upright post, through which the litter handles passed to prevent side sway of the litter.

CHANNELS FOR LOWER LITTERS

The lower litters were carried on a platform, formed by the seats and compartment along the inside of each of the side walls of the ambulance. The hinged seats were inverted to form this platform when used for recumbent patients. These hinged seats, when inverted, rested on metal stops attached at the proper level to front and rear upright center posts. The inner shoes of the litter ran in a channel iron of suitable size attached to the under surface of the hinged seat. This channel prevented the lower litters from slipping side-wise. The front end of the body and the tail gate prevented fore and aft motion.

SIDE AND FRONT OPENINGS

The bodies of some of the foreign ambulances were wide enough to provide a passageway in the center, between the two rows of litters. This was for the convenience of the attendants in waiting on patients. The ambulance board, however, concluded that little attention could be given to patients when the ambulance was in motion over ordinary roads, and that the extra width offered no compensating advantages. If dressings had to be adjusted the ambulance must come to a stop. It was thought better policy to take extra precautions in applying the dressings in the first place. In the few cases where such attention was necessary it was advisable to remove the patient from the ambulance to give it. By means of a large window in front, the attendant could watch the patients. A door was placed on each side through which medicines, water, food, etc., could be given, without moving the patient. This door was provided with a suitable stop, so that it could be left partly open for ventilation; or firmly fastened shut, when so desired. The front window was hinged on its upper edge and could be secured in a fixed position above the driver’s head. This provided ventilation from front to rear. It also allowed the attendant to watch and assist the patients without leaving his seat.

The ambulance board believed that side overhang of a body wide enough to provide a center aisle would make the body higher and heavier and increase the side sway. It would have been necessary, also, on account of the wheel housing, to raise both tiers of litters. This would have raised the center of gravity; which, with the increased width, would have rendered capsizilig snore easy. The advantages of lower litters and a lower center of gravity were constantly in mind, particularly in the design of the new AA model body.


355

HEATERS

At the time of placing the original contracts for motor ambulances in the spring of 1917, the information at hand concerning climatic conditions in France was very meager. The relation of weather conditions to the evacuation of sick and wounded was practically unknown. No reports on the subject had been received. Following the arrival of the American Expeditionary Forces in France more complete and accurate information became available. It was now learned that more adequate protection from both cold and wet proved to be necessary than had been anticipated. This was particularly true for the wounded, generally suffering from shock and its resultant low vitality.

Provisions already had been made for inclosing both the sides and the front end of the ambulance body with composition board, thus affording a thicker and less permeable wall than did the curtains of the open type of body. But even this was considered insufficient protection. Some provision for heating the ambulance was necessary. The heating of automobiles was not a new thing. A common method utilized the exhaust gases from the motor. The device to accomplish this purpose was known to the automobile trade as an “exhaust car heater.” This contrivance consisted of a flexible metallic hose from the exhaust pipe of the motor to a radiating device within the car and another line to carry away the exhaust gases.6

Such a heating device had been developed for the Ford ambulance and was provided by the Ford Motor Co. on all the ambulances delivered in 1917 and without any special provision being made in the contract for it. Investigations with a view of securing a similar device for the General Motors Co. ambulance were begun in August, 1917. The firm which had supplied the device for the Ford ambulance worked out an installation for the Babcock body and the General Motors Co. chassis.7 It was decided to install these heaters on all ambulances sent overseas and on all those at camps in the colder parts of the United States. A contract for 1,500 heaters was made September 29, 1917, 8 and the first deliveries to the General Motors Truck Co. arrived November 1.9 These heaters were found to be faulty in several particulars, but their action was quite good.10 The defects found by the inspector at the General Motors Truck Co. plant were soon remedied by the maker and the changes suggested were effected.11

That heating devices using exhaust gases were not without danger became evident from a report from France that a patient in one of the Ford ambulances equipped with such a device had died, apparently from carbon monoxide poisoning.12 This report indicated that the patient, suffering from a mild contagious disease, had been loaded in the ambulance at the place where he was billeted, for transportation to the station hospital. When the ambulance was opened he was found dead. A companion was in a critical condition. It was assumed in this report that the carbon monoxide had escaped into the car body by passing through the metal of the heating device. It is now believed, however, that the gas escaped through a loose connection beneath the body between the flexible pipe and the fixed metal part of the heater and entered the body through cracks in the floor. When these bodies were designed, cracks were


356

intentionally left in the floor to facilitate flushing or cleansing of the floor when dirty. In this case the ambulance, had been allowed to stand 20 minutes with the body closed and the engine idling. The noxious gases escaping from this loose connection might very well have entered the body through the openings in the floor. The board which investigated the case, however, blamed the porosity of the metal heater.12

This casualty led to the issuance of a general order from the headquarters of the American Expeditionary Forces, requiring that bodies of ambulances equipped with exhaust gas heaters be especially well ventilated.13 It was directed that this ventilation be secured by boring 1-inch augar holes at 3-inch intervals in double row through the wooden front behind the driver and immediately below the roof. Similar holes, 15 in number, were to be bored in the tail gate, grouped about the center canvas litter pocket and between the upright iron braces.

A similar order was issued, upon the recommendation of the Surgeon General,14 by the War Department in March, 1918, in which it was directed that:15 (1) No change will be made in the exhaust system of the engine of any motor-driven vehicle. (2) The exhaust pipe leading from the engine to the muffler will be kept intact at all times. (3) Under no circumstances will any attempt be made to attach or to devise a heater using gases from the exhaust.

MODEL AA

In preparing the standard Babcock ambulance body for overseas shipment, very little assembling was attempted before placing the parts in the crate. Practically only the floor was put together. The remaining parts were shaped and many of the holes bored, but the assembling was left to the artificers overseas. This lack of assembly gave rise to many difficulties in the work overseas, especially by personnel unacquainted with the factory method of assembly.16 These difficulties called for the development of a new type of body in which most of the assembling was done at the factory and only the minimum amount of work left for the assembly unit overseas to do. It was desirable that the assembly to be made overseas be as simple as possible.

Consideration was given to a change in design late in the fall of 1917. An informal “body conference” was held in Washington, D. C., December 17-21, 1917. This conference was attended by representatives of six of the leading body manufacturers of the United States.17 The representatives of the Surgeon General presented the problem confronting the Medical Department, which was a new body of the knockdown type, with a number of improvements over the. body then in use. At this conference the design of the desired new body was developed. By December 29 the drawings and specifications had been completed. They were rushed to the Babcock factory at Watertown for the manufacture of a sample body for test. This body was shipped to Washington, D. C., as soon as completed. It was there mounted upon a suitable chassis and subjected to careful scrutiny and rigid tests. Such changes as were indicated were made and the body finally perfected. Drawings and specifications were revised to conform to these changes and improvements.


357

On May 10, 1918, contracts were let to two manufacturing companies for 5,000 of these new bodies. A contract for 3,000 bodies was given the Anderson Electric Car Co., of Detroit, Mich., at $335.25 per body, with $15.46 additional for crating or $19.96 for boxing. It was stipulated that delivery would begin July 15, 1918, and continue at the rate of 200 to 500 bodies per month.18

The other contractor was the Elkhart Carriage Co., of Elkhart, Ind. A contract for 2,000 bodies was given this firm at $364.13 per body, with an additional charge of $12 for crating or $26.50 for boxing. Deliveries were to begin July 15, 1918, and to continue thereafter at the rate of 125 to 300 bodies per month.19

FIG. 20.- Standard G.M.C. ambulance, 1918, with model AA body, side view.

The contract stipulations concerning deliveries could not be maintained nor did delivery begin on the date specified. One of the prime causes of the delay in deliveries was the question of a supply of canvas or duck for the rear curtain, the driver’s curtain or apron, and the visor or part of the top of the body projecting forward over the driver’s seat. These parts required a canvas 50 inches wide.20 Practically all the looms in the United States making duck were working on contracts with the Quartermaster Corps. The demand for canvas for tents, tarpaulins, shelter tents, and wagon covers was enormous. By the end of May, 1918, the procurement of duck for ambulances had become increasingly difficult. Duck of suitable quality could be had through the Quartermaster Corps in only the 28 ½-inch width. Other widths could not be had.20 Attention was turned to other fabrics for substitutes. A composite fabric known as Meritas cloth was tried out. This cloth consisted of two plies


358

of drilling cemented together. Fears were entertained that it might be too heavy and stiff and develop defects of manufacture. These fears proved groundless, however, with the light-weight Meritas cloth, and it was accepted as a substitute for canvas when the latter could not be obtained.21

FIG. 21.- Standard G.M.C. ambulance, 1918, with model AA body, rear view.  

Requests for the requisite quantity and grades of duck were made upon the Quartermaster General early in June, 1918.22 Some difficulty was experienced in getting this request for duck cleared by the Council of National Defense.23 The contractors were urged to secure suitable duck wherever they could and in such quantities as could be had. 20 A sufficient quantity was secured from the Babcock Co. for approximately 150 bodies.22 Small quantities were picked up from other sources. The Anderson Co. was authorized to substitute the light-weight Meritas cloth for duck on the first 500 bodies.24 The inspector at the Anderson Electric Car Co.’s plant reported June 15, 1918, that arrangements had been made by that company for duck and duck substitute for the first 1,500 bodies. He was of the opinion that sufficient duck for the remainder would arrive before the time it was needed.24

The deliveries of canvas did not materialize as promised. The matter of requisitions for quartermaster duck was turned over to the Motor Transport Service in July. That service was warned that unless a constant urge was applied aggravating delay would occur in the deliveries of the duck. The prospect of securing deliveries was most discouraging. The promises made were


359

fair enough, but when information concerning actual progress of manufacture and delivery was sought it was found very hard to get.25

The demands from our overseas forces for motor ambulances became more and more insistent. On August 5 the inspector at Detroit, who had general supervision of production of ambulance bodies there, was called upon for a conservative estimate of the number of ambulance bodies which could be produced that month. The total supply of the Babcock bodies had been exhausted. Dependence for the number of bodies required during August and succeeding months had to be placed upon the producing plants. A minimum production of 500 bodies from both plants was essential, and larger production during subsequent months was to be expected.26 The inspector advised that 300 bodies could be produced by September 1, 325 between September 1 and September 15, and 800 per month thereafter. He believed that when both plants were in full swing production could be pushed up to 1,300 bodies per month.27 Vouchers for the first two invoices of bodies from the Anderson Electric Car Co. were forwarded from Detroit September 5, 1918.28 For various reasons no bodies were finished at either plant during August. The first shipments made were 9 bodies from the Elkhart Co. September 3, followed on the 5th by 9 more.29 That company produced 236 bodies during September. Subsequent production was as follows: During 1918, October, 447; November, 461; December, 423; during 1919, January, 433. This completed the original contract for 2,000.30

The Anderson Electric Car Co. began deliveries during the first 10 days of September, during which period 116 bodies were completed and 106 shipped to Newport News, Va., for overseas transport.31 Deliveries of bodies by the Anderson Electric Car Co. totaled 2,930 32 and were made, by months, approximately as follows: during 1918, September, 428; 33 October, 446; November, 588; December 818; during 1919, January, 579; February, 81.32

The combined monthly production up to the end of December, 1918, was September, 664; October, 893; November, 1,049; December, 1,241. Assuming that the rate of production during November was uniform, the total production of bodies by these two companies prior to the armistice was 1,980. Adding these to the 3,000 produced by the H. H. Babcock Co. gives an aggregate body production from the date of entry of the United States into the Wor1d War until the cessation of hostilities of 4,907. These figures show that body production did not keep pace with chassis production. At the time of signing the armistice the numbers of chassis and bodies produced were, respectively, 5,900 34 and 4,980. It may be said, then, that the total number of standard motor ambulances, large, produced prior to the cessation of hostilities did not exceed 5,000.

No information is discoverable as to the number of the AA bodies which reached France. These bodies appear to have been placed en route to the overseas forces as rapidly as they were produced. Approximately a dozen of them were directed to domestic use.35 It appears that 1,980 had been shipped at the date of the beginning of the armistice.36 Of these, 517 were at the ports and 66 were in transit.37 It is assumed, therefore, that approximately 1,386 bodies were actually floated before the cessation of hostilities. When the


360

armistice was signed there were 1,395 General Motors Co. chassis at the ports, 243 in transit, and 311 released but not in transit.37

REFERENCES

(1) Correspondence between the ambulance board, the Surgeon General, and The Adjutant General, January 16 to March 8, 1917. Subject: Babcock ambulance bodies. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., 11,220.-136.
(2) Contract between Lieut. Col. C. R. Darnall, M. C., and the H. H. Babcock Co., Watertown, N. Y., for 500 ambulance bodies and schedule of deliveries thereto attached, dated March 13, 1917.  On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., Motor Transport Contracts, 14,509-A.
(3) Letter from Maj. A. W. Williams, M. C., to the Surgeon General, May 3, 1917. Subject: Inspection of Motor ambulance bodies at H. H. Babcock Co.’s plant, Watertown, N. Y. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., 153,155.-35-1.
(4) Letter from the Surgeon General, to the H. H. Babcock Co., Watertown, N. Y., September 24, 1917. Subject: Assignment of inspector. On file, Finance and Supply Division,  S. G. O., 511-570/B.
(5) Contract between Lieut. Col. C. R. Darnall, M. C., and the H. H. Babcock Co., for 2,308 ambulances and 192 spare parts bodies, and schedule of deliveries attached thereto, dated June 13, 1917.  On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., Motor Transport Contracts, 411.
(6) Second indorsement from the chief quartermaster, A. E. F., to the chief surgeon, A. E. F. November 26, 1917, relative to heaters for ambulances. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O.,  250 F. R./157.
(7) Letter from the Standard Parts Co., Cleveland, Ohio, to Maj. Edwin P. Wolfe, M. C., S. G. O., August 10, 1917, relative to Perfection heaters. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O.,  708 A.P./1.
(8) Contract of September 29, 1917, between Maj. M. A. Reasoner, M. C., and the Standard Parts Co., Cleveland, Ohio, for 1,500 heaters. On file, Miscellaneous Section, Finance Department, S. G. O., 2,449.
(9) Letter from Capt. A. B. Browne, Sanitary Corps, Pontiac, Mich., to Maj. W. T. Fishleigh, Sanitary Corps, S. G. O., November 1, 1917. Subject: Perfection heaters. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., Pontiac letters to January 1, 1918.
(10) Weekly report from the officer in charge, Sanitary Corps, N. A., General Motors Truck Co. Plant, Pontiac, Mich., to the Surgeon General, November 5, 1917. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., Pontiac Weekly Reports. 101 A. B. B./178.
(11) Letter from the Standard Parts Co., Cleveland, Ohio, to Maj. W. T. Fishleigh, S. G. 0., November 11, 1917, relative to changes in Perfection Heater. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O.,  708 S. P./13.
(12) Letter from commanding officer, Base Hospital No. 17, American Expeditionary Forces, France, to the chief surgeon, A. E. F., December 30, 1917. Subject: Gas asphyxiation in Ford ambulances. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., 55 #17 B. H./3.
(13) General Orders, No. 2, Headquarters, American Expeditionary Forces, France, January 3, 1918.
(14) Letter from the Surgeon General, U. S. Army, to The Adjutant General of the Army, February 21, 1918. Subject: Automobile ambulances. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., 250 F R./220.
(15) General Orders, No. 24, War Department, March 8, 1918.


361

(16) Letter from the chief surgeon, A. E. F., to the Surgeon General of the Army, August 9, 1917. Subject: Shipment of automobile ambulances. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O.,  250/11.
(17) Letters from the Surgeon General, to various manufacturers expressing appreciation for assistance in body design, December 29, 1917. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O.,  239, WTF/54.
(18) Contract dated May 10, 1918, between 1st Lieut. L. W. Lang, Sanitary Corps, N. A., and the Anderson Electric Car Co., Detroit, Mich., for 3,000 ambulance bodies. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., Motor Transport Contracts, No. 5008.
(19) Contract dated May 10, 1918, between First Lieut. L. W. Lang, Sanitary Corps, N. A., and the Elkhart Carriage Co., Elkhart, md., for 2,000 ambulance bodies. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O.,  Motor Transport Contracts, No. 5009.
(20) Letter from the Surgeon General to Capt. H. E. Smith, Sanitary Corps, N. A., Detroit, Mich., May 31, 1918. Subject: Duck supply. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., Detroit letters to July 1, 1918, unnumbered.
(21) Letter from the Surgeon Genera] to Capt. H. E. Smith, Sanitary Corps, N. A., Detroit, Mich., June 27, 1918. Subject: Substitute. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., Detroit letters to July 1, 1918, unnumbered.
(22) Letter from Capt. H. E. Smith, Sanitary Corps, N. A., Detroit, Mich., to Capt. W. G. Stoner, Sanitary Corps, N. A., Motor Transport Service, Washington, D. C., June 10, 1918. Subject: Requisition, of duck supply. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., Detroit letters to July 1, 1918, unnumbered.
(23) Letter from the Surgeon General to the officer in charge, Anderson Electric Car Co., Detroit, Mich., June 1, 1918. Subject: Duck supply. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., Detroit letters to July 1, 1918, unnumbered.
(24) Letter from Capt. H. E. Smith, Sanitary Corps, N. A., to Capt. W. G. Stoner, Sanitary Corps, N. A., Quartermaster’s Department, Washington, D. C., June 15, 1918. Subject: Duck curtains. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., Detroit letters to July 1, 1918, unnumbered.
(25) Letter from Capt. W. G. Stoner, Sanitary Corps, N. A., S. G. O., to Capt. H. E. Smith, Sanitary Corps, N. A., Detroit, Mich., July 26, 1918, relative to transfer of personnel to the Motor Transport Service. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., Detroit letters to July 1, 1918, unnumbered.
(26) Letter from the Surgeon General to the officer in charge, Anderson Electric Car Co., Detroit, Mich., August 5, 1918. Subject: Ambulance body production. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O.,  Detroit letters, July 1, 1918, to September 30, 1918, unnumbered.
(27) Letter from Capt. H. E. Smith, Sanitary Corps, N. A., Detroit, Mich., to the Surgeon General. Subject: Ambulance body production. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., Detroit letters,  July 1, 1918, to September 30, 1918, unnumbered.
(28) Letter from Capt. H. E. Smith, Sanitary Corps, N. A., to the Surgeon General of the Army, September 5, 1918. Subject: Anderson invoices. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., Detroit letters, September 1, 1918, to December 1, 1918, unnumbered.
(29) Letter from First Lieut. W. L. Dauner, Sanitary Corps, N. A., to the Surgeon General of the Army, September 4, 1918. Subject: Weekly report. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., Elkhart letters, September 1, 1918, to December 1, 1918, unnumbered.
(30) Letter from the Elcar Motor Co., Elkhart, Ind., to Col. Edwin P. Wolfe, M. C., War Department, S. G. O., August 7, 1918. Subject: Body production. On file, Record Room, S. G. O., 451.8-1.
(31) Trimonthly production report, September 10, 1918, from Capt. H. E. Smith, Sanitary Corps, N. A., Anderson Electric Car Co., Detroit, Mich. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., Detroit letters, September 1, 1918, to December 1, 1918, unnumbered.


362

(32) Schedule of deliveries attached to original contract. Account of Maj. C. E. Gray, Q. M. C. On file, Miscellaneous Section, Finance Department.
(33) Trimonthly production report, September 30, 1918, from Capt. H. E. Smith, Sanitary Corps, N. A., Anderson Electric Car Co., Detroit, Mich. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., Detroit letters, September 1, 1918, to December 1, 1918,
(34) Letter from the General Motors Truck Co., Detroit, Mich., to Col. Edwin P. Wolfe, M. C., S. G. O., July 26 1926. Subject: G. M. C. chassis production. On file, Record Room, S. G. O., 451.8-1.
(35) Trimonthly production report, September 10, 1918, from First Lieut. W. L. Dauner, Sanitary Corps, N. A., Elkhart, Ind. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., Elkhart letters, September 1, 1918, to December 1, 1918, unnumbered.
(36) Daily production reports, November 6, 1918, from Capt. H. E. Smith, Sanitary Corps, N. A., Detroit Mich, and First Lieut. W. L. Dauner, Sanitary Corps, N. A., Elkhart, Ind. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O.,  750-519 M.T.C./17.
(37) Memorandum, from Capt. Fred J. Murray, Sanitary Corps, N. A., Embarkation Service, for Col. Edwin P. Wolfe, M. C., S. G. O., November 13, 1918. Subject:  G. M. C. ambulances. On file, Finance and Supply Division, S. G. O., 750-519 M.T.C./17.