Viewing page 119 of 124

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

sulting his records. The prosecution quoted figures "to refresh his memory,' but the witness insisted that these figures meant nothing to him unless he had his data.

Grilled on Gag Charge. 

The line of questioning then turned to the charge of Col. Mitchell that officers of the Air Service are so "bluffed and bulldozed that they dare not tell the truth in a majority of cases, fearing that they will be sent to the most out-of-the-way places."
"Do you refer to the air officers of the Army and Navy in general?" asked Maj. Gullion.
"I refer to myself," replied Col. Mitchell.
"Then you mean that you dare not tell the truth," pursued the prosecutor.
"No. I refer only to the part about being bluffed and bulldozed," Mitchell explained. 
"Then in this statement in which you mention airmen you meant only yourself?" asked Maj. Guillion.
"I meant myself principally," said Mitchell. "As far as I am concerned, I'll tell the truth, but the other officers are afraid."
"Then are these others you speak of guilty of perjury or false swearing before these committees?" demanded the assistant judge advocate. 
Mr. Reid immediately interposed caustic objection to such a question, whereupon Maj. Gullion explained to the court that the witness has said that these officers are not tell the truth, and since they testified before committees, he wanted to know if they were lying in so doing.
Objection Sustained.
Mr. Reid objected again and Col. Winship agreed that the question was not proper. 
"You see, Maj. Guillion knows so little about these congressional proceeding that he isn't able to talk about them intelligently," exclaimed Mr. Reid. "He doesn't seem to know that in most cases the officers brought before these committees are not sworn."
Maj. Guillion then said: "You have just testified that you were afraid to tell the truth."
"I did? Never," said Col. Mitchell. 
Col. Winship said he didn't recall his saying anything like that and Maj. Gullion agreed to withdraw the question. 
"You say that the airmen are bluffed and bulldozed in the majority of cases; then you say you meant that to apply to yourself principally. How do you reconcile your statement of September 5th, that you were afraid to tell the truth, with your assertion now that you always tell the truth?" inquired the prosecution.
"I made no such statement," protested the witness. 
"Of course, he never made such a statement as that," shouted Mr. Reid, rising from his chair. "To say he did is false and misleading."
Winship Backs Defense.
There ensued a lively wrangle between counsel over whether Mitchell had testified this morning that he was afraid to tell the truth. Maj. Guillion insisted that such a statement was in the record and Mr. Reid defied him to point it out. Col. Winship joined in the controversy on the side of the defense. Gen. Graves, member of the court, wasn't sure that the law member had remembered aright and he and he suggested that a recess be taken so that the stenographer's notes could be examined. This was done. 
The stenographer reread the record which showed Col. Mitchell's words to have been "not entirely to myself," in referring to officers who were afraid to tell the truth. He further amplified this when the stenographer finished reading, by declaring: "I made the statement September 5th that in the majority of cases airmen were bluffed and bulldozed, although it has been attempted."
Sees Self Disciplined.
"Do you consider you were sent to an out-of-the-way place as you charged in your statement officers who told the truth would be?"
"I certainly do, as far as influencing air power development is concerned," said Col. Mitchell.
Maj. Gullion drew a picture of the great military activity around San Antonio, Tex,, and on the Mexican border an asked if the witness still thought it was an out-of-the-way place.
"It is, as far as developing air power before Congress and the Department is concerned. I had no command there at all."
"Is it customary for staff officers to have commands?"
"I was assigned so I wouldn't have a command."
This line of questioning was abandoned and Col. Mitchell's book, "Winged Defense," published shortly after he was relieved from duty as Brigadier General and assistant chief of the Air Service, was taken up.
"Did you write pages 102 to 105?" asked Maj Guillion.
"Mr. Reid demanded it be produced for observation and Col. Mitchell replied: "I did."
"In your San Antonio statement you said, "Whenever I make a statement it always is authentic." Now, read to the court the marked places. Mr. Reid suggested that Maj. Gullion read, and the trial judge advocate took up the book. He said he was reading from pages 102 of the book "Winged Defense," by William Mitchell.
"They (referring to the Germans) started the war with a total of 40 submarines. It was a good start, considering the design and construction." Turning to the witness, he said: "You wrote that?" "Yes." 
Quotes From Capt. Hart.
Maj. Guillion then took up a pamphlet and read exactly the same words he had read from page 102 of "Winged Defense," and in a loud and rapid voice declared: "I just read part of a lecture delivered at the Naval War College by Capt. Hart, U.S.N."
Mr. Reid was on his feet with an objection, but Maj. Gullion, who had reached the highest peak of enthusiasm since he began cross-examination, virtually shouted over Mr. Reids's protest:
"I'm going to show the accused cribbed page after pages of this book."
"The courtroom was thrown into a furore, and Mr. Reid shouted to the court:
"Now, he can't get away with that! It shows how much he knows of this case. He wants to try a copyright suit here."
"Maj. Guillion interrupted by recalling the accused's words in the San Antonio statement that "whenever I make a statement it always is authentic."
Col. Blanton Winship, seeing the proceedings rapidly spinning out of control, entered into the argument and demanded: "What part of this refers to the issues in this case?"
Maj. Guillion replied that when Mr. Reid put Col. Mitchell on the stand he said: "There's a witness I don't care who under the sun cross-examines him." He added, "I'm cross-examining him to show he didn't write the book."
The spectators by this time were experiencing the greatest thrill of the morning session if the the entire court-martial proceedings when Col. Winship again took the matter in hand. 
Defense Carries Point.
"This seems to me to be very collateral. If this court has got to go into libel matters it never will get through. Suppose he took every bit in that book from some one else. What has that got to do with the case?"
Maj. Gullion answered: "We wouldn't oppose the proof offered by the defense because we regard it as in extenuation and mitigation and not actual defense. The defense offered witnesses to prove the truth of his statements. I'm offering proof to show his statements are not true."
"I'm ready to pass on that question," said Col. Winship, addressing the president, and he ruled that the objection of defense counsel be sustained and the court held that the pamphlet not be introduced in evidence. 
"The court settled down and Maj. Gullion again took up the questioning. "Did you write all other pages in this book?"
"They are under my signature," replied the witness.
"Have you given proper credit in footnotes to the bibliography?"
Mr. Reid declared the book was in evidence and spoke for itself. Maj. Gullion then said he would introduce it in evidence, but Mr. Reid objected, adding, "Of course I would like to have the court read it."
Book Refused In Case.
The court refused to accept the book in evidence.
The questioning then switched to Mitchell's statement of September 9, in which he referred to the recommendations of some air board having been "squashed," and Maj. Gullion asked the witness if he had referred to the so-called Crowell board. Mitchell said that was true.
"That board recommended a united air force," Mitchell explained, adding that "Capt. Mustin of the Navy subscribed to the principles of a united air force, but with reservations as far as the Navy was concerned."
The prosecution then proceeded to question the witness regarding the work of certain types of airplanes that he recommended the Government develop. Maj. Gullion endeavored to have Col. Mitchell say that these types were actually worthless and unsound, but Mitchell strenuously  defended them before the court. 
The prosecution asked Mitchell if he realized that to carry out all of his recommendations the Nation spent a total of $6,292,278.35, and Mitchell replied that he didn't know that, but it was a good investment.
Grilled on Phraseology.
"You have used the term 'we in the air fraternity.'" said Maj. Guillion. "Is this an organized fraternity?"
"Unfortunately, it is not," replied the witness, shaking his head.
"Of whom is this fraternity composed?"
"Of people who fly in the air - everybody."
"Who are these 'we' who decided to put the matter up to Congress, as stated in your San Antonio charges?"
"Oh, some of us just discussed the situation with regard to air policies and we decided not to stand this sort of stuff any longer."
"You claim that the air policies are dictated by non-flying officers. Are you familiar with the organization of the War and Navy Departments?"
"To some extent."
"You feel familiar enough, then, to criticize the organizations from these departments about the air policies?"
"To some extent."
Shows Board Personnel.
"Do you know who constitutes the joint aeronautical board?"
"Not all of them, but I believe there are two representatives of the air service on it."
Maj. Gullion here named six Army and Navy members of the board who represented, in one capacity or another, the various air branches of the Army and Navy and asked Mitchell if he did not think these officers were qualified to direct the Government air policies. The witness replied that because these members were designated as representatives of the air services he wouldn't call them flying officers, remarking:
"It's easy enough for anybody to get a trick license to call themselves flying officers by taking a little training."
"Has the War Department a general order defining its aircraft policy"? suddenly asked Maj. Gullion.
Col. Mitchell said he believed there was some such order and asked that he be shown it.
"Yes, that's it, unfortunately," remarked the witness. "It isn't worth the paper it's written on. It is one of the most dangerous documents that could be gotten up for the nation defense."
"Didn't this order originate with the Joint Aeronautical Board?" demanded Maj. Guillion.
"Maybe it did, but they aren't flying officers."
Gives Little Satisfaction.
When the court resumed it's session after luncheon Col. Mitchell was grilled by Maj. Gullion on his knowledge, both theoretical and practical, of dirigibles in general and the Shenandoah in particular. The air officer answered the questions in the negative in the majority of cases and brought little satisfaction to the prosecution or the spectators. When he did not give a negative answer, he would qualify his replies by declaring them to be hearsay. When he was asked to explain why in his San Antonio statement he said in one part he "didn't know what happened to the Shenandoah" and later gave what Maj. Gullion described as a detailed account, Mr. Reid demanded that all of that part of the statement be read. The section in question concluded with the words: "I am down here in Texas and have no data, but I believe this statement to be practically correct."
"Do you still believe that statement to be true?" asked Maj. Gullion.
"More so than ever," replied the colonel. 
The subject then switched to "propaganda," and the witness was asked if he ever gave any information to the press while assistant chief of the Air Service. 
"Often," he replied vigorously, "as it was the only way of getting the truth out."
Objection Overruled.
Maj. Gullion showed displeasure at this reply, and moved it be stricken from the record, but his objection was overruled.
After Maj. Gullion had finished reading from the War Department orders outlining the duties of the chief of Air Service with regard to defining the air policies, Col. Mitchell said that the orders were to that effect, but that they were not carried out in a broad sense.
Referring to the transcontinental reliability airplane tests of 1919, during which a number of fatalities occurred, Maj. Gullion asked Col. Mitchell if it were not a fact that he was in charge of that test. The witness replied that he was, and that nearly all of those killed were flying in DH type of planes and that he considered arrangements for the flight had been carefully made. 
Going back to 1913 when Col. Mitchell was a member of the general staff, Maj. Gullion sprung a surprise when he quoted statements made by Mitchell in that year before the military affairs committee of Congress, to the effect that the separate air force should not be countenanced.
Laughs Off Statement.
Col. Mitchell laughed broadly as this was being read and explained: "Yes, I was a member of the general staff then, and I never made a worse statement in my life."
The whole courtroom, including the members of the court itself joined in the laughter.
Several other statements made by Mitchell before the committee at that time and which were directly contradictory to his present announced views regarding aviation matters were read by Maj. Gullion and Col. Mitchell repeated his explanation that he was then on the general staff and that this occurred long before he learned the lessons of aviation from the war.
The prosecution at this point announced it had finished its cross-examination and Mr. Reid began to put a number of questions in re-direct examination, Col Mitchell was asked if he had in mind when he said "treasonable administration" the inadequacy of the national defenses of America's island possessions. He replied that he also meant the national defense of the United States and of the Panama Canal.

[[Last small Headline section on page]]
RADIO CALLS WITNESS TO MITCHELL HEARING
[[Handwritten note about newspaper it is from and date]]
Wash. Star - 11/24/25
Col. Thurman H. Bane, U.S.A.,
   Retired, Monterey, Calif., on
       Way to Washington.

By the Associated Press.
  MONTEREY, Calif., November 24. - 
Col. Thurman Harrison Bane, U.S.A., retired, departed for Washington in response to a radio message directing him to appear as a witness in the court-martial of Col. William Mitchell.  The message, signed by Col. Moreland, trial judge advocate of the court-martial, said that Col. Bane was expected to testify regarding supposed interference with the engineering division of the Army by Col. Mitchell while Col. Bane was commanding McCook Field, at Dayton Ohio.
  Col. Bane retired on December 17, 1922, after Col. Mitchell is supposed to have demanded that the Government use an airplane known as the Thomas Moore type, and Col. Bane resisted the demand.  Members of Col. Bane's family here said they were not advised as to just in what manner Col. Mitchell is supposed to have interfered with the engineering division.