American Military History, Volume 2 by Richard W. Stewart

As the War Department struggled with the complexities of man- power and economic mobilization, Pershing went about organizing and training his forces. To provide logistical support, he created a Com- mander of the Line of Communications, subsequently renamed Ser- vices of Supply, responsible directly to him. After a series of short-term commanders, Maj. Gen. Francis J. Kernan, a capable administrator, headed the Services of Supply; Kernan would be followed by Maj. Gen. James G. Harbord, Pershing's first Chief of Staff. Headquartered in Tours along the Loire River, the supply organization was divided into several base sections built around the French ports, an intermediate sec- tion for storage and classification of supplies, and an advance section for distribution to the zone of operations. Once the AEF entered combat, the advance section's depots loaded supplies onto trains that moved for- ward to division railheads, whence the divisions pushed the supplies to the front in wagons and trucks. Like Goethals' supply organization in the United States, Kernan and Harbord relied heavily on businessmen temporarily in uniform, like Charles G. Dawes, a Chicago banker who acted as the AEF's General Purchasing Agent in Europe, and William W. Atterbury, a Vice President of the Pennsylvania Railroad, who super- vised the AEF's transportation system.

Pershing also established his own General Staff in France. Re- flecting the French system, Pershing's AEF staff ultimately included a Chief of Staff, a Deputy Chief, and five Assistant Chiefs supervising five sections: G–1 (Personnel), G–2 (Intelligence), G–3 (Operations), G–4 (Supply), and G–5 (Training). Under the commander's watchful eye, the staff developed into a confident, competent, and loyal team that understood his goals and standards. As the war progressed, the staff officers could and did increasingly act and speak for Pershing without waiting for his personal approval. This practice would some- time raise the ire of subordinate commanders, who were more accus- tomed to direct contact with their commanding officer than receiving directives and guidance through staff officers. Nevertheless, Pershing's staff officers freed him of the details of intricate planning and ad- ministration and allowed him to coordinate on strategic matters with the allies, confer with his subordinate commanders, and inspect and inspire his troops.