Viewing page 53 of 124

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

COOLIDGE REVEALED AS ACTUAL ACCUSER OF COL. MITCHELL

Rules of Court-Martial Cast Him, Unwittingly, in That Role.

JUDGES AGREE CASE IS "EXTRAORDINARY"

Retreating to the Third-Line Trenches, Defense Demands Bill of Particulars.

BY JOHN EDWIN NEVIN.

President Calvin Coolidge is the only accuser of Col. William Mitchell, former chief of the air service, now on trial before a general court martial for conduct prejudicial to good order and military discipline.

It is considered certain that the President, personally, does not realize this. Neither did Mitchell until yesterday afternoon when the court upheld the contention of the Judge Advocate General of the court that the violation of all of the rules of the Army in presenting the charges was entirely legal.

One of a morass of technicalities which emphasized the enormous quantity of "red tape" that envelopes every act of the army and navy the Mitchell defense forced a "show down" from the lips of Col. Blanton Moreland, judge advocate of the court; approved by Col. Blanton Winship, law member, that the rules of the army as set down in the manual had been violated, but that after all, this was "an extraordinary" case and must be handled in an "extraordinary" manner.

Jurisdiction Upheld.

From the standpoint of progress the entire day was wasted. The court during the morning session ruled out the contention of the defuse that it had no jurisdiction because no crime had been committed. This ruling followed challenges of the decision of the law member - Col. Winship - that the defense was in error in insisting that the eight allegations were in violation of the Constitutional guarantees of free speech.

This decision had been anticipated. So soon as it was made a part of the record counsel for the defense assailed the manner in which the court martial was brought.

It was contended on behalf of Col. Mitchell that the introduction of his entire statements assailing both the War and Navy Departments was illegal. It was pointed out that the manual insisted that in case of a violation of any of the article of war the procedure must be:

Court is Perplexed.

First, a preliminary investigation by the commander of the corps area or the summary court officer of that jurisdiction.

Second, a determination whether there was cause for action.

Third, if an actual offense which constituted a crime had been committed then the immediate commander of the accused must forward recommendations for a court martial and he must father the charges.

The court was distinctly troubled by the raising of this question. Col. Winship demanded that Col. Moreland explain. The latter admitted that the rules of procedure called for action by the immediate commander but insisted:

"This is a very special case The rules do not hold in connection with the accused."

Why President Acted

"Why not?" demanded Brig. Gen. Frank R. McCoy.

"Because," declared the Judge Advocate. "it was President Coolidge himself who ordered this court and the accused, at the time this court was called for, did not have a commanding officer of the type demanded by the manual and the President himself could not get an officer of this type so he was compelled to act on his own initiative."

This declaration enraged Representative Reid, chief counsel for Col. Mitchell an he demanded:

"Does the judge advocate say that the President of the United States investigated these charges and then personally ordered this court? I regret to hear that the old ruling, 'necessity knows no law,' should be brought into play here. The prosecution raises the cry of necessity. What is there about this case which makes it abnormal? If there is something outside of the rules of law and the rules of evidence which demands this action we should know it."

Sees "Old Spartan System."

Earlier in the argument the defense has insisted that, as the prosecution was acting, it was "returning to the old Spartan system of banishment or even lynching a truth teller."

The court finally overruled the defense contentions, but only after Gen. Robert L. Howze had developed from the judge advocate that in an investigation ordered by Secretary of War Dwight L. Davis and conducted by Col. Nugent the War Department chief ad been acting directly for the President.

This was the second ruling against Mitchell by the court during the day, but it had no impression on Representative Reid, who at once stepped into this third line of trenches and assailed the eight specifications, demanding a bill of particulars on the charges. The fact that the prosecution had entered the entire statements of Col. Mitchell made at San Antonio and had not specifically directed attention to the exact statements which are alleged to be in contravention of the ninety-sixth article of war was stress, and the court had before it on adjournment last night the question whether there would be ordered a limitation of this sort.

Verdict Can't Be Forecast.

While the rulings of the court have been universally against the accused officer it is impossible to predicate any final decision on this line-up. As an instance, it was suggested that different officers dissented from the decision of the law member of the court at both times when the exceptions of the defense were being argued and it was held that, because of this fact, the court was divided in its opinions. Nothing of the sort was true. It had been decided that in order to keep the record absolutely reversible proof that whenever there was a point which, under the code was up to the legal member for decision, he being the only qualified law student who would know what it all was about, objection would come so that the court could separately back him up and thus show unanimity.

This procedure likely will hold until the final vote is arrived at. Just when the trial will end is hard to say. The technicalities are far from being exhausted and it is expected that the Mitchell defense will leave no stone unturned to get a decision in its favor. The fact that legal questions which, under ordinary circumstances would be discussed by a law body for a month at least, are being disposed of in minutes helps a whole lot, whether the decisions are actually within the law or only reflect the views of the law member. The crowd which listened to yesterday's proceedings was made up for the most part of women, most of them members of Washington and Baltimore society.

[[image - photograph]]
[[caption]] INTERESTED. An interested member of yesterday's audience at the trial was Chief Justice Grubb, of the Delaware Supreme Court. Justice Grubb is in Washington for the trial.
-Herald Staff Photo [[/caption]]

Doubt Power to Call President.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 30 (p.) -Legal military authorities were certain tonight that the court trying Colonel Mitchell would not consent to issue a subpoena for the President, if asked to do so by Mr. Reid. It has been definitely decided, it was said, that no authority exists by which a court-martial may summon the President as a witness, and it was added that the Supreme Court of the United States had passed upon similar questions.

It was stated that in the event the court should be asked to subpoena President Coolidge it could base a refusal on the precedent established by the general court-martial which tried the Judge Advocate General of the army, David G. Swain, whose court-martial was personally directed by President Arthur.

[[image - photograph]]
[[caption]] CHAIRMAN. Major General Robert L. Howze succeeded Major General Charles Summerall as chairman of the court [[/caption]]

The Omaha World-Herald
Omaha, Nebraska,
November 1, 1925

Light for the Mitchell Trial.

New Orleans, La., Oct. 28 - To the Editor of the World-Herald: There has been considerable in your paper regarding the aeroplane investigation and the trial of Col. Mitchell. You readers would be interested, I believe, in the following information that speaks for itself:

First, I want to say that the American government as well as the big foreign governments have found that in the manufacture of propellers for fast aeroplanes, namely battle planes, that genuine mahogany and walnut are the most suitable woods, and mahogany is used principally because walnut does not run in wide and long lengths, which are needed to build propellers.

As I am connected with a company that are large importers of mahogany, I am in position to know what is being done towards building fast aeroplanes not only by this government, but by foreign governments, and the following is most interesting:

Since the world war the Japanese government through importers, has bought from the concern I am with, as well as competitors, thousands and thousands of dollars of mahogany lumber specially selected for battle-plane propellers. The English government has likewise bought thousands of dollars worth of mahogany lumber specially selected for battle-plane propellers. As far as I can remember I have never even seen a inquiry made from the American government for mahogany lumber or walnut lumber for the manufacturing of aeroplane propellers. The only thing that I do know is that the American government sold all of the mahogany lumber they had suitable for manufacturing aeroplane propellers and they sold their large stock of walnut lumber specially selected for aeroplane propellers which they stored at Dayton, Ohio.

I do not believe there is anybody in the United States today that could accept an order for shipment before 90 days for any quantity of mahogany or walnut suitable for manufacturing battle-plane propellers, so you will see this letter is not written with any hope of creating business, but simply because to me it looks like a telltale that the American government is not doing anything in the matter of building fast battle-planes like the foreign governments, and, therefore, Col. Mitchell has brought to the country's attention a very serious condition.

J. S. OTIS.