Viewing page 231 of 270

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

Comments: What is said above with relation to a, applied with equal forces here. 

c. That the effect of the law would be to require the Army Air Corps to operate as an independent unit separate and distinct from all other military forces, subject to no control other than that of its own corps and officers. 

Comments: This also is true only under a strictly literal interpretation, which, as the Acting Judge Advocate General of the Navy argues, and I agree, is impossible on constitutional grounds. 

d. That the enactment has the effect of transferring to Naval control all aerial operations from land bases established and maintained by the Army wherever it can reasonably be shown that such land bases of the Army are shore stations whose maintenance is necessary for shore operations connected with the fleet. 

Comments: In his closing paragraph, the Acting Judge Advocate General of the Navy argues, in substance, that if the enactment under consideration should be interpreted to transfer to the Army Air Corps control of operations of land bases theretofore under naval jurisdiction, then it would necessarily follow that it would have to be interpreted also as having the effect of transferring to naval control all operations from land bases established and maintained by the Army, wherever it could be shown that such land bases of the Army are "shore stations whose maintenance, is necessary for operations connected with the fleet". The so-called conclusion is thus stated by the Acting Judge Advocate General of the Navy merely as a conditional alternative, based upon an assumed premise which his whole preceding argument is designed to show, and which, I agree, would be unsound. The statute does not transfer the control of aerial operations from existing Navy stations to the Army, or from existing Army bases to the Navy, either in express terms or by any reasonable inference .It Merely designates the classes of bases or stations from which each service may project or control such operations. Although its effect is to render unlawful the projection by the Navy of aerial operations from land bases, it does not confer upon the Army any power to control any operations from any naval base or station, or upon the Navy any power to control any operations from any Army base or station. 

e. Whether the opinion of the Supreme Court in the case of Boske vs. Comingore (177 U.S. 460, 470, April 9, 1900)applies in such a manner as sustains as valid both the enactment of June 5, 1920, and the existing regulations on the subject. 

-9-