The more I see Tolworthy's reproduction of that Stan Lee book, the more I get aggravated. Published in 1947 so its not like decades had passed and people's memories have gottem published. No, its an out and out lie- a lie to protect the rights to a character for a corporation and Stan Lee is a party to it

Notice how the names Joe Simon and Jack Kirby are not even mentioned

By this time both creators had long left Marvel and in fact might have already been in competition with Marvel as the publishers of Prize Comics. Of course Marvel would not jeopardize their claim over what those two had created for them in the past by giving them credit at this stage of the game. Martin Goodman was well aware of  what was going on at that time between DC and Jerry Siegel & Joe Shuster. Comic book protocol at that time was the publisher owns lock,stock and barrel everything within their pages. And the artists had no leeway. They had no union. If they threatened lawsuits they ran the risk of being blackballed from the industry. In many cases they even didn't want to be publicly known as working in the comic book field because they were trying to move into advertising agencies or newspaper strips and comics were thought of as ghetto work. Plus it was unlikely the courts would side with the artists over rights and the publishers could afford hiring legal teams

Stan Lee knew who Caps' creators were. He also knew who signed his paychecks and gave him steady work. And this trait of Stan's continued for decades. Stan never fought as he should for the return of Kirby's artwork. Stan spoke from both sides of his mouth regarding creator rights. Stan Lee was a company man through and through

I'm old enough to have witnessed Stan at comic book conventions  in the late 1960s and early 70s when he was still editor at Marvel. He never, ever gave writing credit to anyone but himself back then. The same held true with all his early radio and print interviews. Only as the years rolled by and Stan was no longer active with Marvel and Martin Goodman was gone did Stan slowly, ever so slowly admit to what Kirby and Ditko brought to the table. 

So again, read that page that Tolworthy reproduced and then ask yourself if you can believe anything that Stan claims about the creative process at Marvel. There are tons of interviews and testimonies from Roy Thomas and the pencillers of the books that Stan would give the artist a one-paragraph synopsis of what the issue should be about or a few minutes in his office for a verbal synopsis. That was Stan's part in kicking off the creation of an issue. 

That's a possible explanation, but personally I view it more as a sign that Stan is a company man.

Great subject, tolworthy! We don't often get to see such cool historical material!

Another great reproduction Tolworthy. 

By 1947 the comics industry was radically different from where it was pre-WWII. It now looked like it was here to stay and the publishers wanted complete control over their products. By this time most credits were gone from the comics pages or 'house names' were being used.You're not going to find any truth to those reasons in Stan's tract. More likely causes would be

1-Credits were being discouraged by the publisher. Building up a cult following for the artists and writers went against the concept of controlling the product for the company. They wanted the readership to follow the characters-not the creators, They wanted the credit of who was behind the creation of a popular title to rest with the company, not the independent contractors doing the work

2-Company's were afraid of creators being lured to the competition if their names were made public. Ever wonder why Gene Colan had to use the alias of Adam Austin in his earliest 1960's Marvel work or John Romita getting credit as Johnnie Ray? They were working mainly for DC at the same time and DC threatened to drop artists if they worked for the competition (even though they technically were not employees). DC would either warn their staff away from outside work or not give credit at all. In fact, within DC each editor had his own group of titles that were run like little fiefdoms and staff was discouraged to work for more than one DC editor at a time  

3-As I mentioned before, comic book work was thought of as a very lowly profession and many artists and writers did not want their true names linked to the work and in the public eye. Many were trying to get out of the field and work in the ad agencies or syndicated comic strip field. That's where they intended their true names to be revealed.

Poor old Johnnie Ray, sounded sad upon the radio, moved a million hearts in mono.  Did you mean Frank Giacoia, whose early Marvel inking was credited to Frankie Ray?

D'oh.. these nom de plumes can get so confusing. Anyone see Mickey Demeo lately? 

It is possible that Goodman may have instructed S & K to create a super-patriot hero, as MLJ's Shield was already a hit, followed by The Eagle and Uncle Sam, and others,  and Goodman was known to follow trends. But it likely was only a suggestion, sans details, and may have been along the lines of "Copy the Shield!"