Viewing page 101 of 124

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

Then the witness said that if Gen. Drum based his statement on the figures and without any knowledge of the subject he would be correct. 
 When Col. Moreland asked the witness if Gen. Drum made his statements intentionally Mr. Reid objected and the trial judge advocate began a conference with Maj. Wilby. President Howze waited patiently for a moment and then adressed the trial judge advocate, saying "I prefer you would sit down, colonel, so you can get quick conference with your adviser."

 Quizzed On Mathematics. 
The witness did not answer the question, and then the prosecution inquired: "How many hundred yards square in a square mile?"
 The witness thought 260 and refused to figure it out for Col. Moreland.
 "Assuming there are 309.76 yards square in a square mile, how many pounds of gas per square mile would be necessary to cause evacuation, in as much as it would require 515 pounds per 100 yards square."
 "I don't want to take the court's time in figuring it out," replied Mr. Cassidy.
 "The court will tell you if you are taking its time, kindly figure that out," requested Col. Moreland. 
 Col. Cassidy said it would require 160,000 pounds roughly, and for an area of 60 square miles 900 tons would be necessary.

  Says Figures "Absurd." 
Taking the figures given by Gen. Drum, 9,571,584 pounds of mustard gas as being necessary to cause evacuation of the District, Col. Moreland again asked if they were correct. The witness replied they were not and it would be "absurd" to assume they were the result of the formula he followed in determining 900 tons.
 Col. Moreland asked that provided these figures were in the book which the Chemical Warfare Service had approved would he object to them, and Representative Reid asked that the book be produced. An argument ensued, and was finally settled by Col. Winship, who though the prosecution was justified in testing the witness as an expert.
 "If 515 pounds of mustard gas are necessary to evacuate an area 100 yards square," said Col. Moreland, "would it not require 9,571,584 pounds to evacuate the District of Columbia."
 "It would not," responded the witness.
"Did you have any experience in gas work in the war?" asked Col. Moreland.
 "If you mean as commanding officer of troops, no; but I had plenty of experience on the receiving end."
 "Then all your knowledge is obtained by study?"
"Not at all," returned the witness.

  Reid Enters Questioning. 
Representative Reid then took up the questioning and asked why Gen. Drum's testimony was misleading.
 "I heard Gen. Drum make four statements," and here Col. Moreland objected because the witness was not giving a direct answer to the question. Gen. Howze also cautioned the witness "to stick to the question."
 To evacuate the District of Columbia with gas it would require 900 to 1,000 tons, the witness said, but no intelligent enemy would use mustard gas, as Gen. Drum referred to. They would use tear gas instead he added.
 The trial judge advocate once more objected to the answer because he declared Gen. Drum mentioned only mustard gas in his statement, and Representative Reid declared, "We want to show that he deceived the committee, as mustard gas is not the gas to use."
 Col. Winship overruled the objection and Col. Cassidy continued with his statement that "no enemy commander would be foolish enough to waste material on an area of no value." He produced a map of the District of Columbia pointing out the valuable areas and those of no concern to an enemy. The proceedings were interrupted at this point for a moment, while Brig. Gen. Edward L. King requested the identity of three men siting behind a section of the court.

Cameramen Ousted.
"They are photographers, but not mine." said Representative Reid. "They're not mine either," replied Gen. King, and Gen Howze ordered them from the courtroom.
Returning to the map, Col. Cassidy said there are 16 square miles in the District "worthy of consideration of an enemy commander. But he would not use mustard gas."
Gen. Howze showed considerable irritation at this answer and interrupted to once more caution the witness to stick to the question, adding "he is giving us a lecture on the subject."
"What amount of gas would be required for that area?" asked Mr. Reid. Reid.
"I object," said. Col. Moreland, "on the ground the witness has had no experience, and his answer would be theoretical."

Col. Winship reminded him he had cross-examined the witness to determine his expertness, but the trial judge advocate replied "my examination did not show him to be an expert. I object to the lectures of the witness."
Col. Cassiday, however, was given another chance to answer the question, and he declared 6 tons of tear gas would be used by an enemy on the 6 square-mile nerve center and 100 tons altogether.
Col. Moreland asked if he would use tear gas instead of mustard gas "to do a quicker job," and the witness replied that did not enter into the consideration. He also told Col. Moreland that airplane gas attacks at night were most effective.

Asked About Experience.
"How much experience have you had in dropping gas bombs from airplanes at night?" asked Col. Moreland.
"None," replied the witness, and the court took up questioning. Col. Cassidy was asked if gas bombs were dropped during the late war, and the witness replied they were, but none on large cities. President Howze wanted to know what steps had been taken to change any defective data in the manual approved by the Chemical Warfare Service, which he had criticized as incorrect. The witness said he could not answer the question. In reply to another, he said all forms of opposition against an airplane attack with gas bombs were taken into consideration when determining how many bombs are necessary for a given area.
 Maj. Herbert A. Dargue, chief of the war plans section of the Army Air Service and a pilot for the past 15 years, was the second witness called. He explained his duties, including handling all matters pertaining to war plans in which the Air Service was concerned and also to special projects like the world flight. He was designated by Gen. Patrick to work on anti-aircraft tests and told of the decision of a special committee last April to fix 13,500,000 cubic feet as the volume or hypothetical airplane targets until a more accurate figure could be arrived at from tests then underway at Aberdeen Proving Grounds. The tests there, he said, showed the danger area of an airplane to be about 6,000,000 cubic feet.

New Target Not Used.
Representative Reid questioned him closely as to whether this new target was used at the Fort Tilden, N. Y., anti-aircraft tests, and Maj. Dargue replied the commanding officer of the 2d Corps Area had been informed of the new figure, but it was not adopted.
The witness was asked if he was at Camp Dix during the bombing tests there and responded that he attended them as an observer. He said that the tests were to determine whether the Coast Artillery could eliminate and shoot down airplanes before the latter reached their objective.
When he was asked if there were any orders regarding the publicity in connection with these tests, Col. Moreland interposed an objection, and the court told Representative Reid to lay down a basis for the question. When he sought to do this there was further objection from the trial judge advocate, but it was not sustained.
Maj. Dargue testified that there was an order from the War Department in which it was said that it was the desire of the Secretary of War that publicity in connection with these tests be avoided. When he and Gen. Patrick arrived there, he continued, they found a large number of men in civilian clothes who were indentified as reporters. On making some inquiry as to the reason for their presence he was informed by Maj. Wilby that the lid had been taken off of publicity in the 2d Corps Area. Representative Reid asked him if the lid had been taken off publicity for the Air Service and he said it had not.
Then getting down to the actual tests, he testified that he had heard six airplanes come over the target, a simulated ammunition dump, and drop their "bombs," which in this case were flares. He said that it was night, and he was unable to see the planes until after they had performed their mission, when they turned on their navigation lights. In all cases, he said, the machines dropped their flares prior to illumination by the searchlight on the ground. He said that each bomber, according to orders for the test, was supposed to drop his bombs when in the target's area. Officers were stationed on the ground to insure that they did this, otherwise they would not score a hit. Had the bombs been dropped in accordance with these orders in time of war, they would have landed past the targets. Under the rules of the test it was a miss, he said, if they released their bomb before getting within the defined area.

Testimony Draws Fire.
Repeated efforts were made by the prosecution to keep out of the record testimony as to a conference called last Summer to discuss insurance for flyers.

The witness testified that he was one of three officers of the War Department designated to meet similar committees from the Navy, Post Office Department, and Veterans' Bureau, 12 in all, to consider the matter of additional insurance for flyers. Further questioning along this line was halted temporarily when the prosecution sought to develop whether he was the custodian of all the records relating to this matter, and Representative Reid said that this was not proper, as the witness might not have all of the records, but what he did not have the prosecution could produce, if it desired.
The courts at this point took a recess until 2 o'clock, leaving the question as to the admissibility of such records as Maj. Dargue had until that time.
 When the court opened its afternoon session after the luncheon recess, Maj. Dargue was on the stand to finish his testimony, and as business was about to begin Col. Moreland arose and announced that Capt. Paul Foley, who was charged yesterday by Mrs. Zachary Lansdowne with attempting to influence her testimony before the Shenandoah board, was in the courtroom.
"Capt. Foley," said Col. Moreland, "requested me to ask the court's permission to allow him to testify at this time in connection with the testimony given yesterday. I ask this in his own right and in justice to him in the eyes of the public, and I indorse this in the name of fairness."
Representative Reid immediately objected, declaring: This is a peculiar request, the prosecution is expected to bring in testimony in rebuttal at the proper time. I know nothing of his testimony and have not talked with him. It is not fair to the defense and the circumstances are not such that he testify at this time."
"Does the judge advocate insist on the presentation of the witness?" asked Col. Winship.
"In justice to Capt. Foley, I must press my motion," replied Col. Moreland.

Motion Is Overruled.
Col. Winship then overruled the motion, the court sustained him, and Capt. Foley was directed to leave the courtroom.
The attention of the court then was directed to the witness in the chair, who produced certain papers in connection with part in a War Department conference several months ago in which flying pay and insurance for air men was discussed, The witness was brought to the stand to bear out statements of Col. Mitchell that the War Department was trying to take away flying pay.
Col. Moreland objected to the paper, declaring the matter was one in which the War Department was deeply interested and its side of the case should be protected. Before he would permit the witness to testify on this flight pay subject, he said, he would like to see all the papers in the case.
Representative Reid, in reply to this argument, declared the papers belonged to Maj. Dargue personally, and they were given to him in connection with his duty and to work with. Mr. Reid said he had requested more papers bearing on this subject, but the prosecution had not delivered them to him.
"He asked for an abundance of papers," said Col. Moreland, addressing the court. "We are getting them as fast as we can. By his statements he is creating a false impression on the minds of the court and the public that we are keeping them out."

Reid Retorts Sharply.
"If you had given us a bill of particular," declared Representative Reid, "we might have passed this over. You never supplied us with a single paper we asked for."
Col. Winship thought it better to wait until the papers arrived with their custodian in the War Department. "All right," said Representative Reid, "we ask for the Secretary of War to come here with these papers."
"The Secretary of War has been called on to produce them," replied Col. Winship. "I think it would save the time of the court to have all of them here."
Reid said the Secretary of War or no one else had custody over the papers in Maj. Dargue's possession.
"They are trying to hold the War Department responsible for reducing flight pay," said Col. Moreland. "It is not fair, therefore, to introduce part of these papers into the record."
"Well, we can remove all this by your signing this paper," said Representative Reid, holding up a typewritten sheet which he said stipulated all the official papers in connection with the charge that flight pay was being considered for reduction. "He had this for a week and he must have writer's cramp," said defense counsel, addressing the court.

Never Saw Stipulation.
"Lieut. Col. McMullen (assistant trial judge advocate) informs me that he never saw that stipulation," replied Col. Moreland.
"Well, then there's unity of command there," commented Representative Reid.
"And we won't sign it," declared Col. Moreland.

"Have you ever signed any?" shot back Representative Reid, visibly irritated.
"Yes"
"Where are they?"
"I don't know."
The verbal battle was interrupted here by Col. Winship, who sustained the objection of the trial judge advocate to the introduction of Maj. Dargue's documents and correspondence on the flight pay question.
"Then," declared Representative Reid, who by this time seemed to on the point of losing control of his temper, "it is impossible for us to proceed with this case because the prosecution has refused to produce subpoenaed documents which he now objects to. We have no further testimony to offer at this time."
Col. Winship asked Col. Moreland if he had anything to say on this subject, and the latter replied: "I asked the War Department to produce them and they were very wiling to help. My information is they are unable to get all of them together owing to a demand for more documents which was made in the last few days. Many of the papers will be here this afternoon or tomorrow morning, and I wish to state we have complied with the defense's requests as far as has been possible to do so."

Moreland Asks Delay.
Col. Winship asked if Representative Reid had another witness he could bring to the stand at that time, and the chief defense counsel replied: "None that this objection does not apply to."
Col. Moreland then made a plea for several days to examine the documents and confer with the defense on what extracts were wanted, adding: "I think the time of the court will not be lost."
Representative Reid  asked Col. Moreland to examine the papers held by Maj. Dargue and whether they were correct. After a brief study of them the judge advocate reported he was unable to tell if they were authentic and the court was cleared, presumably to determine the question of a recess and the status of the defense witnesses for this afternoon.
When the court resumed its public session President Howze asked the defense counsel if he had another witness available. Mr. Reid responded that he had no witness to which the same objection made by the judge advocate against Maj. Dargue's testimony would not apply.

Adjournment Set.
Then Gen. Howze announced that the court would adjourn until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning, with the understanding that both sides would take immediate steps to get the necessary papers which they expected the witnesses to put into the record. Representative Reid interrupted to say that he could not tell in advance what detailed paper he would need at any particular time. He charged that the defense had not been treated fairly in that the prosecution had not had the papers called for produced in the court.
"We have never had any trouble in this case heretofore in the putting of papers in the evidence until the general staff came into this case," said Mr. Reid, pointing in the direction of general staff officers sitting at the table of the trial judge advocate. "They are saying that they are not proper record. If they hold them back I can't subject my client to any action that might hurt his case by telling the prosecution in advance what particular paper we want at a particular time."
Col. Moreland said that the prosecution has produced all of the papers except two or three, but time would have to be given to go over them, and he thought that in the interests of both sides an adjournment of several days should be taken. Mr. Reid then responded that the War Department ought to be able to produce any of the papers the defense asks for within 24 hours. He said that he did not blame Col. Moreland for the delay, but this was another illustration of how the War Department "moves through military channels" and causes delays.

Moreland Raps Reid.
There was hand-clapping in the courtroom when Mr. Reid concluded, and Col. Moreland, referring to Mr. Reid's remarks as a political oration, said that he resented the imputation htat the War Department has not done everything possible to get the papers before the court. He said the defense counsel seized upon every opportunity to make speech to the galleries.
President Howze then asked Col. Herbert A. White, military counsel for Col. Mitchell and Lieut. Col. Joseph I. McMullen, assistant trial judge advocate, if they thought a two-week adjournment would be an unreasonable time. Both replied that they thought it would be unreasonable and that the papers from the War, Navy, and Department of Agriculture which have been asked for could be examined by both sides in a much shorter time.
The court at this poinnt went into executive session to consider the matter of the length of the next recess.