"Lend Lease" M1s?

[dave]

An example I can give is the following. Mossberg made model 44MB .22 rifles as 'Lend Lease' for Britain, paid by the US. Contracts ran from 6-41 to 3-43. Prices ran from 10.00 ea. to 13.95. over the years. The 10.00 dollar rifles cost the Brits 65 cents ea., the rest paid by the US. They were sold to the British people in the 50,s and many were shipped to the US and sold here.

[musketshooter]

It was my understanding that true lend-lease rifles had to have been made and sent to England before our entry into the war (December 1941). Once we were in it, I thought the deliveries stopped.

[AlanD]

An example I can give is the following. Mossberg made model 44MB .22 rifles as 'Lend Lease' for Britain, paid by the US. Contracts ran from 6-41 to 3-43. Prices ran from 10.00 ea. to 13.95. over the years. The 10.00 dollar rifles cost the Brits 65 cents ea., the rest paid by the US. They were sold to the British people in the 50,s and many were shipped to the US and sold here.

They were Model 42MB rifles rather than M44's.

Regards

AlanD
Sydney

[dave]

They were Model 42MB rifles rather than M44's.

Regards

AlanD
Sydney

You are quite correct. As the pols say 'I mis-spoke' or in this case mis-wrote! The 44's were 44US and stayed here, must, if not all, with the Navy

[Redleg]

I seem to recall that the "Lend Lease" program also may have included a 100 year lease on the island of Diego Garcia.......the value of that acquisition may have to enter into the discussion of forms of payment and ownership of said firearms, ships, etc etc.

Clearly the US never tried to grab the Garands, when they left England.....or when at Kleins, in Chicago.

[dave]

I have seen a picture of Brit Troops in Korea armed with MI's. It may be in Scoot Duffs book. So they were being used, to some extent into the 1950's by the Brits!

[AlanD]

I seem to recall that the "Lend Lease" program also may have included a 100 year lease on the island of Diego Garcia.......the value of that acquisition may have to enter into the discussion of forms of payment and ownership of said firearms, ships, etc etc.

Clearly the US never tried to grab the Garands, when they left England.....or when at Kleins, in Chicago.

This deal pre dates Lend Lease and is known as the "Destroyers for Bases Agreement" . In brief the UK gave freehold some naval bases to the USA and leased some others for 99 years in exchange for 50 four stack destroyers. If you Wiki this term you can get plenty of info on this.

All this happened in 1940 early 1941 which is 75 years ago which means in less than 20 yeas the lease's will be up. Be interesting to see what happens then.

The Garand's you see British troops armed with in Korea we supplied in theater and were not purchased by the UK or from left over stocks the UK had from WW2. Regards

AlanD
Sydney

[AlanD]

The 48,000 or so M1s that were sent to Great Britain in World War II are usually referred to as "Lend Lease" rifles. I got to thinking the other day that they may actually be "sales" rifles. A little bit of background:

1) In addition to the M1s about 60,000+ Remington M1903 rifles got sent over to the UK, as well. Most of these (if not all) were NOT Lend Lease, as the UK had invested about a million dollars in "start-up" costs when Remington was tooling up to produce these rifles. Great Britain was, in effect, "paid back" with rifles when the Remington M1903 went into production.

2) Under the terms of Lend/Lease, the receiving country, when the war was done, had to do one of the following with material they had received through this program: 1) pay for it; 2) destroy it; 3) bring it back.

3) There are numerous photos of the UK dumping over the side Lend Lease equipment, such as aircraft and vehicles; large numbers of Lend/Lease ships were returned to the US, where they were generally scrapped. Obviously, Great Britain was not in the financial position after WWII to pay for any of this stuff.

Just to keep the argument straight, I'm NOT talking about M1s or other rifles given or loaned to countries AFTER WWII, such as the Greeks.

4) In the early 1960s, relatively large numbers of M1 Garands were sold through places as Interarmco, Kleins and other businesses; it is conceded that most of these were the early Garands sent to the UK.

Where I am going with this is I would suggest that these M1 rifles were PAID for, much as were the M1903s and most of the M1917 rifles. If the rifles were paid for, the "owning" country was free to do what they wanted with them. In other words, they were Sales rifles, NOT Lend/Lease.

Just wondered if anyone has or has seen any documentation for the M1 rifles sent to the UK?

That's

Rick

I have not seen any documentation in the National Archives in London about the 38,001 Garand rifles that were supplied under Lend Lease. Personally I think these would have been forwarded to allies.

What I have seen is numerous references to 30,000 Garand rifles. 25,000 were supplied to the Air Ministry and so would have ended up with the RAF. I have seen very detailed instructions on completely stripping a Garand in an official RAF armorers manual. The remaining 5,000 were supplied to Combined Operations. I believe it is these rifles which Interarms purchased - they bought 25,000 of the British government. These ended up in Guatemala, Haiti and Indonesia. I think these 30,000 were paid for and are separate to the 38,000 odd that were supplied under Lend Lease.

Regards

AlanD
Sydney

[John Sukey]

Just an add. Te British call it lease lend since they provided access to some of their colonies in return.

[dave]

[The Garand's you see British troops armed with in Korea we supplied in theater and were not purchased by the UK or from left over stocks the UK had from WW2. Regards

AlanD
Sydney[/QUOTE]

Why? did they arrive in Korea un-armed? Just wondering. While I did meet some Brits in Korea (spent the afternoon sloppin beer at a NAAFI (sp?), I was stationed across the road from a Canadian Med. Unit. Never saw any rifles they used however. Being AF, we had MI Carbines.