Viewing page 92 of 124

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

MRS. LANSDOWNE SAYS NAVY OFFICIAL ASKED HER TO GIVE 'CANNED' EVIDENCE 

Wash. Star - 11/12/25

Widow Informs Court-Martial Capt. Foley Sent Her Note With Testimony to Repeat at Airship Inquiry. 

FLYERS' LIVES MENACED, SAYS STAFF OFFICER 

Searchlight Tests at Camp Dix Subjected Pilots to Danger of Landing at Night in Rough Terrain, Declares Lieut. George, Criticizing Plans.

That Capt. Paul Foley, U. S. N., sent her a prepared statement through Mrs. George W. Steele, which was to be her sworn testimony before the naval court of inquiry into the wreck of the airship Shenandoah, which her husband, Lieut. Comdr. Zachary Lansdowne, commanded on its fatal flight, was the sensational testimony given today by Mrs. Margaret Ross Lansdowne, appearing as a witness before the Mitchell court-martial. Capt. Foley was the judge advocate of the naval court of inquiry.
Mrs. Lansdowne's testimony was the highlight of today's proceedings, but it was followed this afternoon by charge that the lives of Army airmen were jeopardized by the refusal of the War Department to approve Air Service recommendations that the searchlight-airplane tests conducted at Camp Dix, N. J., several months ago be held at Mitchell Field, Long Island.
Lieut. H. L. George, office chief of Air Service, this city, gave this testimony. Lieut. George said the bombing planes were stationed at Camp Vail and had to fly over rough terrain for 60 miles before reaching Camp Dix, where they were sought out by searchlights. Motor trouble would have necessitated a forced landing and certain crash, or the airmen would have used their parachutes and allowed the airplane to plunge wild down into one of the many settlements in that vicinity, thereby endangering lives and property of those on the ground, he said.
Protests by Representative Reid, defensive counsel, against closing the court to take so-called confidential testimony, unless the President of United States should issue supplementary orders, and testimony to the effect that the Hawaiian Islands were taken by the Navy in the recent maneuvers because of the failure of the military and naval services to profit by the lessons of unified air operations as learned in the Panama Canal maneuvers, also featured the late afternoon testimony.

Substance of Statement.
Today was the first time that Mrs. Lansdowne had made public the name of the woman who brought to her the paper on which was written the "canned testimony," and it was forced from her by a demand from Col. Sherman Moreland, the trial judge advocate. Mrs. Steele is the wife of Cmdr. George W. Steele, U. S. N., commanding the naval air station at Lakehurst , N.J., and also the dirigible Los Angeles, the non military airship. 
Although Mrs. Lansdown [[Lansdowne]]  said that the statement was on plain paper, it bore the Government watermark. When asked how she could identify it as coming from Capt. Foley she said she had the statement from her friend who brought it, and it was then that he [[the]] prosecution insisted on the name being given, although Mrs. Lansdowne pleaded to be excused.
The "testimony" prepared for her, she said, was an insult to her husband's memory. She then told of Capt. Foley's calling at her home in Washington two nights before she was to appear before the court of inquiry, at which time he sought to get from her an outline of just what she would tell on the witness stand. 
She told him at that time, she testified before the court, that she would make her statement only when she was before the court and sworn as a witness. It was the second day after this conference, she continued, that the canned "testimony" was handed her by Mrs. Steele.
When representative Reid sought to put certain naval correspondence relating to the Shenandoah into the record it was handed first to Col. Moreland, the trial judge advocate.
Then there ocurred a lull in the proceedings, during which the judge advocate conferred with two men in civilian dress, sitting close to him. After the lapse of a few minutes Representative Reid rose and demanded to know who they were. The judge advocate responded that theye were Capt. M. G. Cook and Capt. A. W. Marshall, United States Navy. Representative Reid pressed for answer as to who they represented and whether they were sent there by the Navy Department, and Col. Moreland responded that they were there to advise him.

Mrs. Lansdowne Called.
The court session got under way in a buzz of excitement when, immediately on convening, Representative Reid called for Mrs. Lansdowne as the first witness. She was ushered into the room, and, as she approached the stand, the board of general officers and the entire courtroom arose and paid respect to the widow of the Shenandoah's commander, while President Howze greeted her with "Good morning." She was sworn by the prosecution and turned over to Representative Reid for examination. 
"What is your name and address?" asked representative Reid.
"Margaret Ross Lansdowne, 1740 M Street northwest, Washington D.C.," she replied.
"What was your husband's name?"
"Zachary Lansdowne, lieutenant commander, United States Navy, commander of the Shenandoah."
"Do you remember the occasion of the court of inquiry into the Shenandoah disaster?" 
"Yes."
"Did Capt. Paul Foley of the court deliver a paper to you before you testified?"
"Yes."
"Have you got it here?"
"No, I tore it up."
"Can you state in substance what was in that paper?"

Objection by Moreland.
Here Col. Moreland objected, declaring the matter was not known to the accused at the time he made his statements and on which the charges against him are based. 
Representative Reid said: "The triad judge advocate does not understand the purpose of this testimony. Col. Mitchell charged the Navy would proceed with a whitewash board in the case of the Shenandoah and that they tried to get the witness to give false testimony."
Col. Moreland continued to reiterate his objection and added that the statement of the accused with reference to the Shenandoah was a prophecy.
"But it is subject to trial, though," remarked Mr. Reid. Col. Winship, the law member, thought a proper foundation should be laid for the question, and inquired if the trial judge advocate would cross-examine her now as to why she tore up the paper. He also said that the court would like to hear further why the testimony would be immaterial or irrelevant. 
"There is no necessity for citing authorities for the act commmitted is usually done as the result of something known. One cannot say the accused was actuated in his statement by the existence of facts."
"Then we're in the most peculiar position in the world," commented Representative Reid. "Col. Mitchell said these statements were 'in my opinion' and now the trial judged advocate says he couldn't know what was going to happen. Nevertheless they are trying us on things we said were going to happen and when we bring in proof he says it is immaterial. This witness will testify that an officer of the Navy Department came to get her to make a statement which was false. Here was a case of white-wash and she is the only one who knows."

Basis of Objection. 
Col. Winship then concluded that Col. Moreland's objection was raised from the standpoint either of extenuation and mitigation or of actual truth.
Representative Reid then read from the charges and specifications which contained the Mitchell statements and included the declarations that the Navy department woould have a "white-wash board" for the Shenandoah. Then turning to Col. Moreland he said: "You do not think the statements here are sufficiently direct to permit to be introduced."
"It all is subordinate to the main statement," replied Col. Moreland. 
"What is it?" asked the defense. 
"Something about while the hounds or dig-dogs are being followed by the pack," said the judge advocate.
"That's the first specification I've heard," returned Mr. Reed. We are glad to know it. We are glad to know it. We are being tried on everything here in the statement. 
The objection of the judge advocate was overruled by the law member, and the witness was directed to tell the court the substance of the destroyed letter.
Mrs. Landsdowne said it was handed to her by the wife of a prominent naval officer. It contained three paragraphs, the first saying that "when I first accepted the invitation of the court of inquiry I felt my husband needed defense, but since then I've changed my mind." 
The second paragraph said "my husband always regarded the Shenandoah as a man-of-war, was not to be used for exhibition purposes, but he was ready and willing at any time to use it for military purposes regardless of the conditions of the weather or landing fields." 

Thanks to Court. 
The third paragraph, Mrs. Lansdowne testified, "gave my thanks and appreciation to the court and said I was willing to leave the matter to them."
"Is that true or false?" asked Representative Reid.
"False," replied the witness, in a clear voice. 
"Who wrote the letter?"
"Capt. Faul Foley."
"Who gave it to you?"
"It was given to me by the wife of a prominent naval officer, who is a very good friend of mine."
"Tell the court wherein this statement was false."
"Its reference to the fact that my husband was willing to take the Shenandoah anywhere and at any time regardless of weather or landing facilities was an insult to his memory to insinuate he would do it."
"Did you appear before the Shenandoah board?"
And when Mrs. Lansdowne replied in the affirmative Representative Reid produced a typewritten paper and asked her if it was a copy of the statement she made to the naval court. 
"Yes, sir, it is."

Protest by Lansdowne.
Representative Ried then read the statements made by Mrs. Lansdowne in which she pointed out that certain recommendations of her husband for the itinerary of the Shenandoah had been disapproved by the chief of naval operations because the "State affairs do not occur at that time," and further recommendations that the flight of the dirigible be postponed owing to incompletion of the Detroit mooring mast and also weather conditions in the Middle West. This statement also declared her husband protested as vigorously as a naval officer could, but to no avail.
"Did you give that testimony?" asked Mr. Reid.
"I did," replied the witness.
Col. Moreland objected to this phase of the witness' testimony before the court-martial on the ground that it was an opinion, and when Mrs. Lansdowne produced official correspondence on which the statements were based the objection was overruled by the law member. Col. Moreland then went over the correspondence with the three naval officers who sat with the prosecution and Mr. Reid became impatient over the time taken to read the letters. 
He asked if the prosecution would stipulate the itinerary of the Shenadoah and other facts given wide publication in the newspapers and Col. Moreland replied: "I don't think we can stipulate the itinerary, but we are willing to stipulate the fact that the Shenandoah was lost."
"You and I never are going to agree," commented Mr. Reid when Col. Moreland showed an indication to meet on neutral ground. Representative Reid held up a paper and said: "Here is the itinerary. Do you object?" And the trial judge advocate said he did not.

Loss of Life Stipulated.
The fact that 14 lives, including that of Comdr. Lansdowne, were lost on the Shenandoah also was stipulated to save the time of the witness and then the business turned back to the sensational letter Mrs. Lansdowne received.
"Did Capt. Foley come to see you before you testified at the board of inquiry?"
"Yes, sir, two nights before the board convened," and here Representative Reid turned over the witness for cross-examination.
Col. Moreland developed that his visit occurred on the 7th of October and at the the home of Mrs. Lansdowne's uncle, Dr. William. B. Mason, 1738 M street.
"He sent me the papers the following day and I received it at the home of my uncle."
"On the night Foley called on you, did he confer with you on what you were to say?" asked Col. Moreland.
"He did not."
The witness in answer to further questions from the prosecution told of a visit to her at Lakewood, N.J., by Capt. Walter Gherardi, aide to Secretary Wilbur, on the 4th of September.

Interviews to Papers.
She said she had a conversation with him regarding interviews she was purported to have granted to newspapers the day after the accident in which Secretary Wilbur was held responsible. 
"Did you say that your statements regarding the Navy Department were lies?" 
"No," replied the witness. "I told Capt. Gherardi that one statement alleged to have been made by me and holding the Secretary of the Navy responsible was not correct." 
"You told him, then, that you got the Associated Press to put denials of this on the wires and were not satisfied?"
"I told him I had put a statement on the wires denying any reference to the Secretary of the Navy, and also had arranged that he be called by telephone."
"Did you state to newspaper reporters that your husband had a premonition that this was his last trip?"
"No; I told them he said it was his las trip, and he would be glad when it was over. I told them he had no premonition, but was making the trip over official protest." 
Col. Moreland, with this statement, concluded the cross-examination, and Representative Reid asked: "Is Capt. Foley a personal friend of yours?"
"I never met him before," replied the witness. Capt. Foley was the judge advocate of the Shenandoah court of inquiry. 

Asks Testimony Be Read.
At this point Maj. Gen. Benjamin A. Poore requested that the stenographer read Mrs. Landsdowne's testimony as to the substance of the Foley letters, explaining that the photographers behind the court made so much noise he did not hear all of it. The stenographer began to pore over his notes, and Representative Reid arose and said: "While he is looking for that, I would like to ask you when Foley had a talk with you."
President Howze interject that "the reporter can't look for that and take notes, too. Whereupon Mr. Reid sat down amid laughter from the court. He requested the president to obtain more order in the court and Gen. Howze so instructed the officer in charge.
Failing to find Mrs. Lansdowne's account in his note book, the stenographer gave up the search and Mrs. Landsdowne repeated it for the benefit of Gen. Poore and the entire courtroom, which had heard but smatterings of it, owing to the noise.

Visit by Foley. 
Representative Reid then asked the witness what Capt. Foley said to her on the night of his visit.
"Capt. Foley said he wanted to impress upon me the importance of the court and said its powers are greater than any Federal court and that I should tell the truth.
"I said I couldn't tell him what statements I would make to the court." 
"Tell me the entire things you are going to say," she quoted him as saying.
"I said I didn't want to, but then I said my reasons for appearing would be to show that the Shenandoah was sent on a political flight, and it was proven by official correspondence in the record, which was been slurred over.
"He told me it was not right to say the flight was a political one, as the taxpayers in the country had a right to see their property.
"I said the navy doesn't send battleships into the Great Lakes to show them to the people, and he said it could not be done. I said they could not send the Shenandoah out there, and they were so stupid it had to be proven to them."

Informed by Bearer.
When counsel had completed the cross-examination the court took the witness in hand to ask a few questions itself. Mrs. Lansdowne asked how she that the paper handed her in connection with the Shenandoah inquiry was from Capt. Foley. She replied that the woman who handed it to her told her that it had been sent by Capt. Foley.
Col. Moreland then expressed the opinion that the witness should be required to furnish the court the name of this woman. Mrs. Lansdowne said she would prefer not to make her name public. When the prosecution insisted, however, she announced curtly:
"Mrs. George W. Steele."
Mrs. Lansdowne was then excused, and Maj. Raycroft Walsh, chief of the Finance Division of the Army Air Service, was called to the stand. 
Maj. Walsh at the outsed was questioned by defense counsel regarding estimates for the Army and Navy Air Services for the coming year. The trial judge advocate immediately objected on the ground that such matter was confidential, immaterial, irrelevant and incompetent. There ensued a discussion between counsel and the court over this question, and as a compromise Representative Reid then followed a different line of questioning in an endeavor to have the estimates introduced. 
"Don't you know that the Navy's estimate for its Air Service for the coming year is 37,360,248?" asked counsel of the witness, "and that the Army's estimate for the Air Service was 24,580,000?"