Viewing page 80 of 124

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

from Gen. Drum, and sought and obtained from the witness an admission that they were not correct.

Court Is Recessed.
After informing the court that he proposed to put these hearing in the evidence for the express purpose of proving the inaccuracy of statements by Army officers, the court admitted the hearings to the record.
Col. Moreland then withdrew his motion to expunge in view of the development of testimony to contradict witness of the Government before a congressional hearing.
The witness was then turned back to the defense for rebuttal, but Represertative [[Representative]] Reid requested the court to recess at this point and he would begin the rebuttal examination at 2 o'clock when the court reconvened. 

Says 20 Tons Would Do.
Gen. Fries, on taking the stand again this afternoon, testified that he had not been consulted by Gen. Drum prior to the latter's statements regarding chemical warfare. Defense counsel had the witness bring out that if he were attacking the District of Columbia by gas "tomorrow" he would use 20 tons of tear gas, which would be "several times the actual amount necessary under ordinary conditions." Twenty bombing planes could carry this amount of gas, it was stated. Gen. Fries said that the airplane was indispensable for longrange gas warfare. The witness then was excused without further questioning. 
Capt. Robert Oldys of the war plans section, office of the chief of Air Service, the next witness called, furnished some fireworks during his short inning on the stand, and, after the testifying as to her expert knowledge of the Government's air defense plans, was excused temporarily until he could go to his office and bring back all records bearing on the air defenses of the Panama Canal. 
Capt. Oldys created a stir in the courtroom when he testified that the recommendations of officials in the war-plans section of the Air Service have not been follower "in a great many of instances." Representative Reid asked the witness to tell the court of the difficulties he had encountered in trying to get the War Department to carry out these recommendations for air defense. Col. Moreland interposed some objection to this question, and Representative Reid then changes his query as follows: "Have you been supplied with the necessary personnel or equipment to carry out your air mobilization plans?"
"I have not, sir," replied the witness.

Goes for Papers.
Representative Reid then requested Capt. Oldys to outline in detail the condition of air personnel and equipment in the Government's overseas possessions, asking "as a starter" what air strength was called for in Panama. 
The trial judge advocate immediately objected to the question on the ground that the witness' testimony would not be the best evidence. Defense counsel then said he would submit the official records covering this question. There ensued a period of discussions as to whether such records were confidential, and Col. Moreland at the same time entered an objection to the submission of these papers on the ground that they were "irrelevant, immaterial, incompetent and confidential."
Representative threw the courtroom into laughter when he arose to remark: "Well, he doesn't like him at all."
Col. Moreland repeated his objection, but the court directed the witness to secure the necessary papers. 

Scores Condition of Planes.
Maj. Carl Spatz, in charge of the tactical unit section, training and war plans division, office of the chief of Air Service, and with nearly 10 years' flying experience behind him, followed Capt. Oldys on the stand. His testimony dealt with the aircraft in the tactical units of the Air Service, which are made up of bombardment, pursuit, attack and observation planes. The equipment, he said, in answer to question by Mr. Reid, "has reached a condition where it is difficult to figure out how we can continue flying. The airplanes we have are either obsolescent or obsolete and are not adapted for the purpose intended."
Reading from a report showing the number of planes in the various tactical units as of September 30, Maj. Spatz, under examination by the defense, declared there was only one standard airplane in the first pursuit group, which is the only fighting unit in the country. By standard, Maj. Spatz said he meant airplanes that were build or remodeled in the present period. The other classes in which the tactical unit planes are divided are substandard obsolete and training. All D H's observation planes were build during the war and, while some have been rebuild with steel fuselages, the wings are the original war product, he said. There are 58 bombing planes with the tactical organization and 39 observation planes in this class. 
Col. Moreland raised one or two objections to the paper from which Maj. Spatz read, but finally requested that it and others be put in as evidence, which Mr. Reid agreed to do.
To properly equip the peace-time unit in the tactical organization with airplanes, 336 must be acquired, Maj. Spatz added.

Says Bombers Out of Date.
Maj. Spatz testified that he "wouldn't care to go to war with any of the standard pursuit planes now in service."  He explained that they had been in use for three years, which was about the maximum service they should be expected to give.  Taking up the de Haviland type planes, the witness expressed the opinion that this type of ship is hazardous, and subjects the personnel to great danger in rough country, due to possibility of forced landing.  He said that 21 such ships are in use at Camp Stanley, which is located in unfavorable terrain.
Maj. Spatz asserted that none of the pursuit planes now in service are as completely equipped as they should be, stating that some lack proper radio equipment, oxygen apparatus, etc.  Questioned regarding the bombing ships in Hawaii, the witness said that none of the 10 Martin bombers stationed there could carry modern 2,000-pound bombs.
 Representative Reid the switched the questioning to air races and had the witness bring out that it was his opinion as as expert that a racing planed should never be used after the first year.  This testimony was introduced after Maj. Spatz had said that he was present when Capt. Skeel met his death in an air race.
Personnel Below Par.
  The witness told the court that the flying personnel of the bombardment groups was not up to the requirement "even of peace-time strength."
  When Representative Reid started to question the witness in detail regarding this insufficiency in personnel the trial judge advocate announced his objection to the "general answer of the witness" on the ground that Maj. Spatz had no personal knowledge regarding this matter.  Defense counsel then proceeded to show that the witness had both documentary and first-hand knowledge of the strength of the various air groups, and Maj.Spatz informed the court in this connection that he had recently seen the attack bombardment and pursuit groups mobilized at Mitchell Field.

Personnel Below Par.
  The witness told the court that the flying personnel of the bombardment groups was not up to the requirement "even of peace-time strength."
  When Representative Reid started to question the witness in detail regarding this insufficiency in personnel the trial judge advocate announced his objection to the "general answer of the witness' on the ground that Maj. Spatz had no personal knowledge regarding this matter.  Defense counsel then proceeded to show that the witness had both documentary and first-hand knowledge of the strength of the various air groups, and Maj. Spatz informed the court in this connection that he had recently seen the attack bombardment and pursuit groups mobilized at Mitchell Field.

[[bold]] All-Day and Part-of-Night Sessions Of Mitchell Court Barely Averted [[/bold]]

Wash. Star 10/10/25
The Mitchell court-martial almost blossomed out into an all-day and most-of-the-night affair yesterday.
As the session came to a close at 4:30 p.m. Gen. Howze, president of the court, announced that the suggestion had been made to him that the hours for the trial be lengthened so as to start at 8:30 every morning and end at 5 o'clock every afternoon and that night sessions be held.
The suggestion did not set well with Representative Frank R. Reid of counsel for Col. Mitchell, however.
"Really, now," Representative Reid protested at once, "I am as anxious as any one to facilitate this trial, but I am only human.  I have spent a good part of each night since the trial examining witnesses and preparing testimony.  I have no time to myself now.  If night sessions are held I will be greatly handicapped and the presentation of the defense will be slowed up rather than quickened."
"I had thought that the military councel assigned the defense by the judge advocate's office had been of some help to you," Gen. Howze replied with a smile.
"Oh, he has been of wonderful help, wonderful, but we have had a lot of work to do," Representative Reid stated.  "I had six stenographers working last night preparing that statement and arranging our case.  There is a limit of human endurance."
"How do the present hours suit you?" Gen. Howze inquired.
Representative Reid declared they were all right.
"Court is adjourned until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning,: the president of the court announced, settling the discussion, at least for the time being.

Herald - 11/??0/25

[[bold]] Street Rumbles Drown Trend of Mitchell Trial [[/bold]]

[[bold]]By DIXIE TIGHE [[/bold]]

Flapping of window shades and the thunderous rumbling of trucks drowned out a great deal of yesterday's testimony in the Mitchell hearing.

The poise, however, stimulated the drowsy court.  Closed windows and excessively hot radiators created a disagreeable stuffiness resulting in nodding heads not confined to spectators.
Simultaneous with the introduction of General Amos A. Fries' testimony as to the overpowering effect of tear gas, the court ordered the windows opened.  It evoked a laugh and a subsequent whispering of "What did he say?"
[[bold]] HEAR ONLY SNATCHES [[/bold]]
Blinding sunlight was counteracted by half-drawn shades.  The wind kept them fluttering, and the constant stream of heavy traffic, selecting its moment of passing most inopportunely, meant that those in the back of the court heard only snatches of the flying colonel's defense evidence.
Last week the continuous overruling of the objections voiced by the defense counsel had made the courtroom familiar with the law member's formula and the president's response.  In fact, the spectators rather gloried in joining in the recitation.  
Yesterday when Colonel Winship, the law member, pronounced the first words of the well-known quasher, no one expected a deviation.  But the  
trial judge advocate's objections to a point in General Fries' testimony was overruled and the courtroom gasped its amazement.  Colonel and Mrs. Mitchell, as usual, failed to express their reaction toward the victory.
[[bold]] BABY'S PHOTO EXHIBITED [[/bold]]
During the brief morning recess, Mrs. Mitchell proudly exhibited a snapshot of her baby girl.  The baby, in Detroit with her grandmother, received a two-day visit from her mother during the trial's adjournment last week.  Mrs. Mitchell says she fears the baby will be grown-up, if the trial lasts much longer.
Helen Gould army cots in a collapsed state, lay under the press room tables yesterday.  Army blankets and bedding were piled on the tables.  At night the guards transform the press room into a bed room.  At the close of yesterday's session telegraphers were careful to disconnect their instruments.  The guards had registered a complaint that they did not care for their night clicking as a lullaby. 

[[PHOTO]] [[bold]] Photo of Their Baby Daughter [[/bold]]