THE CHINA SERVICE MEDAL BY: LTC ALBERT F, GLEIM

The initial campaign in the Pacific Theater of WWII is considered by many historians to have started on July 7, 1937. On that date Imperial Japanese forces responded to the so-called "China Incident" at the Marco Polo Bridge outside Peking. Japanese expeditionary forces streamed into China, and Peking fell on July 29th. During August Japan declared a mobilization and extended operations to the Shanghai area and the Yangtze River.

The US tried to maintain astrict neutrality during this period, but the naval forces stationed in Chinese waters to protect US com- mercial interests quickly became subjected to the dangers of an ac- tive campaign. The 4th Marines garrisoned the US sector of the In- ternational Settlement at Shanghai and were reinforced in September by the 6th Marines to form the 2nd Brigade under Brigadier General John C. Beaumont. The Commander-in-Chief of the Asiatic Fleet, Ad- miralH. E. Yarnell, kept station off Shanghai on his flagship, the USS Augusta, from August 1937 until the following January. A vari- ety of other US vessels showed the flag at Shanghai, up the Yangtze and at other Chinese ports.

As the fighting progressed, generally inland, aviators and artil- lerymen on both belligerent sides displayed very poor ability to distinguish neutral warships from those of their enemies. However, a corresponding lack of accuracy usually reduced the damage and casualties that otherwise might have been expected.

The first documented reference to a medal to recognize US naval service in China during this period was a letter from Admiral Yar- nell to his principal commanders in April 1938. In this letter he invited recommendations for individual commendation and stated that before he terminated his command he would recommend the issuance of a service medal as recognition for personnel operating ashore and in China waters since July 7, 1937. He kept his promise in Decem- ber 1938 in a letter to the Secretary of the Navy via the Bureau of Navigation. His recommendation observed that the Japanese forces had by then gained complete control of the coast of China, the Yang- tze River as far as Hankow, and the Pearl River as far as Canton. Thus there was little likelihood of further service by US forces in the areas of actual fighting. The proposal for anew medal received favorable indorsements from the Commandant of the Marine Corps, the Navy Board of Awards, the Chief of the Bureau of Navigation (Rear Admiral ChesterW. Nimitz), and the Acting Chief of Naval Operations. Creation of the medal was approved on July 25, 1938 by Charles Ed- ison, Acting Secretary of the Navy.

The Bureau of Navigation was assigned the responsibility for im- plementing the decision, and their first action was to query the office of the Chief of Naval Operations for alist of vessels oper- ating in China waters since July 7, 1937. A list of vessels and dates of service was obtained and a draft general order announcing the medal was prepared. The Board of Awards reviewed the general order and recommended deletion of six ships which had performed only "service of supply" in China waters during the period of hostili- ties. No termination date was established for the line ships still in Chinese waters. This recommendation was accepted and General Order 135 was published August 23, 1940 announcing the China Ser- vice Medal. General Order 176 of July i, 1942 fixed the termination date for qualifying service as September 7, 1939.

Copyright 1979 by Albert F. Gleim.

Procurement of the actual medals proceded slowly. The adminis- trative details were delegated to Edward Henkel, Chief Clerk of the Bureau of Navigation. The tasking by the Bureau to Henkel suggested the design represent "service" since the US operations :involved neither a war nor a campaign.

Since WWI the Navy had been required to secure the approval of the Commission on Fine Arts for all medal designs. The Navy knew through previous unhappy experience that the Commission would ulti- mately insist on a design executed by a professional sculptor and that this would be a protracted and expensive process. Since funds had been planned for medals and dies, but not for a design, the Na- vy’s first thought was to obtain the services of the coinage and medal designers of the US Mint. In April 1940 a formal request was made to the Department of the Treasury for assistance with designs for the medal. A reply the following month stated there were two designers at the Mint qualified to design medals, but they were too heavily involved in coinage to undertake an additional assignment.

The next recourse was a design competition among professional sculptors. Announcements were sent to more than 75 sculptors in July 1940. Proposals were to be opened on August 12th and the win- ner of the competition was to receive a $I,000 contract to execute the selected design in plaster. Proposals were received from 28 individuals and firms, and these were first reviewed by the Board of Awards. The Board identified the four designs it liked best, and then the entire group of proposals and the Board’s recommendations were passed on to the Commission on Fine Arts in September 1940. The Commission promptly reviewed the designs and approved one of the four favored by the Board of Awards. This was desSgn 19a submitted by George H. Snowden of New York City. This design featured an old full-rigged sailing ship. Minor changes were made in the design, first by the Board, and then by the Commission.

Rejected design for Yangtze Service Medal. Similar to design 22 proposed for China Service Medal and also rejected due to Chinese sensitivity.

The matter of the design was far from settled. Admiral Nimitz thought the sailing ship was inappropriate in that such a vessel hadn’t been present on China station in 50 or 60 years. He recom- mended a form of junk, though not a duplicate of the Yangtze Ser- vice Medal design. The Board of Awards reconsidered the designs and recommended number 22. This was not a junk, but a pagoda, the Tem- ple of the Dragon in Shanghai. This design was apparently the pro- posal of Jennings Hood, formerly with Baily, Banks, and Biddle, de- signers and producers of all the early Navy campaign medals. In December 1940 the Commission on Fine Arts approved design 22, though again with minor changes. Research started on the changes when it was remembered that a similar design, featuring the Temple of the Dragon, had been approved for the Yangtze Service Medal in 1931, then changed because of Chinese Embassy objections. Thus the tem- ple design was also unacceptable for the China Service Medal and the Commission was so informed in March 1941.

Plaster model of design 22a by Jennings Hood, Great Wall of China. Rejected by Commission on Fine Arts due to lack of artistic merit.

The next selection by the Board of Awards was another Jennings Hood design, number 22a featuring the Great Wall of China. The sculp- tor member of the Commission on Fine Arts, Paul Manship, was rather cool toward this design and asked to see it made up in a plaster model. The Navy complied, securing such a model from Hood without cost or future obligation to the government. In May 1941 the Com- mission viewed the plaster model of design 22a and rejected it with the comment"the treatment of form is commonplace and without merit."