Viewing page 20 of 124
This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.
MITCHELL ACCUSED OF 8 VIOLATIONS OF DISCIPLINARY CODE Star - Oct 23-25 Formal Charges Are Served Upon Colonel by Agent of Adjutant General. QUESTION OF ARREST IS STILL UNSETTLED Reid Argues Service of Papers Amounts to Jailing- Army Disputes Issue. "Conduct to the prejudice of good order and military discipline" was charged against Col. Mitchell today in court-martial specifications served upon him as a result of his attack several weeks ago on the conduct of the Army and Navy Air Services. The statement issued by Col. Mitchell at San Antonio after the crash of the Shenandoah, said the formal accusation, constituted insubordination and was "highly contemptuous and disrespectful" to the War Department. It was in this statement that the colonel declared the loss of the Shenandoah was due to criminal and almost treasonable conduct of the Air Services. The specifications also relate to two later statements. Rucker Brings Charges. The charges are brought in the name of Lieut. Col. Kyle Rucker, chief of the military affairs section of the judge advocate general's office, and were served upon Mitchell by Col. Joseph R. McMullen, assistant judge advocate general. Representative Reid of Illinois, counsel for Mitchell, declared the service of the papers carried with it technical arrest of the colonel, but the War Department officials disagreed. They said the technical arrest probably would take place immediately before the officer is placed on trial before a general court-martial here next week. The specifications against Col. Mitchell are eight in number, all brought under the ninety-sixth article of war. These specifications are as follows: 1. That Col. Mitchell on September 5 (after the wreck of the Shenandoah) "did conduct himself to the prejudice of good order and military discipline" 2. That Col. Mitchell on September 5 "made a statement insubordinate to the administration of the War Department" Department Seen Discredited. 3. That Col. Mitchell on September 5 "made a statement highly contemptuous and disrespectful of the administration of the War Department with the intent to discredit the same, to the prejudice of good order and military discipline." 4. Same as specification 3, except that it refers to the Navy Department instead of the War Department. 5 to 8. Same as the first four, but referring to the statements made by Col. Mitchell on September 9. Col. Mitchell's charges, which brought about direction by the War Department, as contained in his statement from San Antonio September 5, follow: "I have been asked from all parts of the country to give my opinion about the reasons for the frightful aeronautical accidents and loss of life, equipment and treasure that have occurred during the last few days (referring to Shenandoah and the PN-9 No.1, then believed destroyed). This statement, therefore, is given out publicly by me after mature deliberation and after a sufficient time has elapsed since the terrible accidents to our naval aircraft to find out something about what happened. "My opinion is as follows: "These accidents are the direct result of the incompetency, criminal negligence and almost treasonable administration of the national defense by the Navy and War Departments. In their attempts to keep down the development of aviation into an independent department, separate from the Army and Navy and handled by aeronautical experts, and to maintain the existing systems, they have gone to the utmost lengths to carry their point. Says Chiefs Inefficient. "All aviation policies, schemes and systems are dictated by non-flying officers of the Army or Navy, who knows practically nothing about it. The lives of the airmen are being used merely as pawns in their hands. "The great Congress of the United States, that makes laws for the organization and use of our air, land and water forces, is treated by these two departments as if it were an organization created for their benefit, to which evidence of any kind, whether true or not, can be given without restraint. Officers and agents sent by the War and Navy Departments to Congress have almost always given incomplete, misleading or false information about aeronautics, which either they knew to be false when given or was the result of such gross ignorance of the question that they should not be allowed to appear before legislative body. "The airmen themselves are bluffed and bulldozed so that they dare not tell the truth in the majority of cases, knowing full well that if they do they will be deprived of their future career, sent to the most out-of-the-way places to prevent their telling the truth and deprived of any chance for advancement, unless they subscribe to the dictates of their non-flying bureaucratic superiors. These either distort facts or openly tell falsehoods about aviation to the people and to the Congress. "Both the War and Navy Departments maintain public propaganda agencies which are supposed to publish truthful facts about our national defense to the American people. These departments, remember, are supported by the taxes of the people, and were created for the purpose of protecting us from invasion from abroad and from domestic disturbances from within. What has actually happened in these departments is that they have formed a sort of a union to perpetuate their own existence, largely irrespective of the public welfare- and acting as we might say, about a commercial organization that has entire control of a public necessity-'as an illegal combination in restraint of trade.' "The conduct of affairs by the two departments, as far as aviation is concerned, has been so disgusting in the last few years as to make any self-respecting person ashamed of the clothes he wears. Were it not for the patriotism of our air officers and their confidence in the institutions of the United States, knowing that sooner or later existing conditions would be changed, I doubt if one of them would remain with the colors- certainly not if he were a real man." Col. Mitchell Served With Charges News - Oct 23-25 Flying Colonel Must Remain in Washington Until Trial Is Over Many Want to Help Col. William Mitchell today was formally served with charges against him and notified to appear for court martial next Wednesday. The formality was performed by Col. Joseph I. McMullen, of the Judge Advocate General's office, who called on Mitchell at his home here shortly after breakfast. McMullen had no authority to put Mitchell under arrest. Must Stay Here Mitchell was notified again that he must stay in Washington, which according to his civilian counsel, Rep. Frank Reid, Ill., amounts to technical arrest. War Department officials, however, said Mitchell would not be formally arrested until probably next Tuesday, the day before trial. Mitchell is deluged with offers from hundreds of ictizens [[citizens]] to testify in his behalf at his court martial. Mitchell's mail normally is heavy but since the War Department has announced he must stand trial for his bitter denunciation of administration of the air forces, it has almost doubled. Defense Conference The high points of Mitchell's defense will be perfected over the week-end by the colonel, Reid and Col. Herbert A. White, military counsel for the defense. White is judge-advocate for the Eighth Corps Area, where Mitchell is stationed. He is due here tomorrow. Mitchell Judge [[Image]] Maj. Gen. Fred W. Sladen, superintendent of the Military Academy at West Point, who will be a member of the court martial which will try Col. William D. Mitchell. [[cutoff]]ME OF PAPER EVE PUBLIC LEDGER PHILA PA OCT 22 1925 MITCHELL'S PRIZE MONEY FOR SHENANDOAH WIDOWS Mrs. Lansdowne to Distribute $1000 Colonel Received for Bravery Washington, Oct. 22.- When Colonel William Mitchell issued his charges of "almost treason" against the heads of the Navy Department, charging them with responsibility for the wreck of the Shenandoah and the death of fourteen of her gallant crew, the War Department ordered him court-martialed. But a weekly magazine pinned a medal on his chest and gave him $1000 reward for courage. It was learned yesterday he is getting rid of the $1000, though he is keeping the medal among his large collection. The colonel announced he intended to give his "hero" money to the dependants of those, who, he said, were the real heroes of the Shenandoah disaster. Mrs. Margaret Ross Lansdowne, widow of the dirigible's dead commander, is to distribute the presentation money among fellow mourners. [[cutoff]]E OF [[cutoff]]APER BROOKLYN DAILY EAGLE BROOKLYN NY OCT 22 1925 COLONEL MITCHELL AT THE BAR. The 96th Article of War in the Army is known as the article under which a soldier may be tried when all other ninety-five articles fail to offer a means of getting rid of him. The fact that Colonel Mitchell is to be tried by a court of generals need occasion no surprise. An officer, to be court-martialed, must be tried by his superiors in rank. But that Major General Summerall should be made president of the court, after his testimony before the Morrow investigating commission, would appear to be a case of bad taste. The War Department might at least have named a presiding officer of the same rank who has not already spread himself on record as opposed to everything that Colonel Mitchell represents. The move of the Navy to get under Colonel Mitchell on the stand under oath in the Shenandoah inquiry and thus give the Judge Advocate of the Army the benefit of learning the flying critic's defense in advance of the trial has already prejudiced many open minds against the Army's case. So far as the 96th Article of War is concerned, it might be pointed out that, although unlikely to be invoked, it contains authority to try, say, a captain who makes a face at his colonel at officers' call. The charge under this article offers as little opportunity for Colonel Mitchell to offer justification for his criticism of the sacrosanct War College and War Department as could be found. All that remains to make a farce of the trial is to keep the court closed. The Army appears determined to remain the Army. It insists on making a cause celebre, regardless of a mounting public hostility which is apt to come back as a boomerang through Congress.
