Viewing page 42 of 75

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

WITNESS CHARGES MITCHELL SENT MEN ON DEATH MISSION

Wash. Star - 12/9/25

Reserve Officer Displays Marked Hostility to His War Chief's Orders.

CROSS GRILLING BRINGS WARNING FROM COURT

Implication That Man on Stand Was a Croward [[Coward]] is Seen by Gen. King.

The charge that Col. William Mitchell, while chief of the first American Army Air Service in France, ordered day bombing planes to fly on missions in severe weather which resulted in the loss of life and airplanes was made before the Army general court-martial this afternoon by Howard G. Rath, captain Air Service Reserves and a member of the day bombardment group during the war. 

Mr. Rath, the only flying officer either active or reserve, to display such hostility toward the accused, was subjected to a severe grilling on cross-examination by Representative Frank R. Reid, chief defense counsel, which resulted in a member of the court interrupting for the second time today and objecting to that type of questioning. 

Gen. King Objects.

Brig. Gen. Edward L. King declared: "I object to insinuations that this witness is a coward. A man may do things in line of duty even if he had physical fear."

Col. Blanton Winship, the law member, thought the witness could take care of himself very well, and President Howze told the witness he "must not be confused by Mr. Reid's questioning" and "to take your time and don't let your impulses carry you away." 

Gen. King's objection was based on Mr. Reid's inquiry if Mr. Rath was afraid of anti-aircraft fire, which he previously had declared to be "one of the biggest menaces we had." Mr. Reid took the position that the witness had avoided fortified places because he was afraid of the result of anti-aircraft artillery, but Mr. Rath shouted to the court: "I am not afraid." 

This drew an outburst of applause from a number of women among the spectators, who at other times signified their approval of points scored by the witness. This proved to be the first anti-Mitchell feeling in evidence among the spectators since the court began.

Thought Weather Too Bad.

Mr. Reid drew from the witness that he thought the bombers should not be ordered out, on account of bad weather, even if the orders came from Gen. Pershing. 

A second attempt by the prosecution to prove Col. Mitchell guilty of plagiarism when he wrote a book, "Winged Defense," was thrown out today. 

The attack on the authorship of the book was made by Maj. Allen W. Gullion, assistant trial judge advocate, who had endeavored to prove the accused "cribbed page after page" of the book when Col. Mitchell was testifying in his own behalf. 

Today's action against the accused and the book was launched after Capt. T. C. Hart, commanding the battleship Mississippi in the battle fleet, had been brought to the stand and presented copies of lectures given by him several years ago, which Maj. Gullion charges Col. Mitchell with lifting page after page and declaring he wrote the book himself. 

Courtroom Grows Tense. 

The courtroom was thrown into a tenseness it has not experienced since the last attempt to discredit both the book and its author. A few minutes before this occurred, however, the monotony of the proceedings was broken when Brig. Gen. Frank R. McCoy interrupted Representative Reid's cross-examination of a prosecution witness and declared his "manner was offensive." Gen. McCoy thought the court should decide on the continuance of such practices by Mr. Reid, and defense counsel heatedly replied it was the duty of the law member to call such things to his attention. 

Col. Winshop thought Mr. Reid could pursue his questions closely, and Maj. Gen. William S. Graves declared under the manual regulations Gen. McCoy's point was correct in that it was the duty of the court in this respect. President Howze prevented further argument by requesting Mr. Reid to continue, and at the same time reminding him he was under a precaution voiced by the court several days ago.
 
Gullion Moves Deliberately.

Maj. Gullion went about his attack on the book and its author with more deliberation than on the first occasion. He read from a prepared brief which emphasized his witness was being offered in rebuttal and to impeach the testimony of the accused.

"The doors were opened to the defense to prove the truth of every statement the accused made," said Maj. Gullion, "and the prosecution is entitled to prove their falsity. In his statement he referred to the book 'I have written' and also said 'whenever I make a statement it is authentic. I am always willing to back up every word.'

"When the accused was testifying in his own behalf I asked him if he wrote pages 102-105 of the book and he replied 'I did.' The old rule of 'false in one, false in all' holds good here. The falsity is in his claim of authorship. The prosecution has a right to prove that such parts were taken without permission and were deliberately cribbed from a lecture delivered by another man many years ago.
 
Charges Lectures Lifted.

"The comparison of the lecture with pages 102-109 will demonstrate that substantial portions of that book were copied verbatim. 

"The accused has held himself out as an authority on aviation, but admitted on the stand that he held merely opinion. It is our purpose to show that the accused is not the sole author of 'Winged Defense.'"

Maj. Gullion declared he did not attack the veracity of the defense witnesses or the defense counsel, but concentrated his efforts against the accused. 

Mr. Reid objected, and after much deliberation, during which Col. Sherman Moreland, the trial judge advocate, who had not seen the brief, was requested by the court to read it, this reference to the defense was withdrawn by Maj. Gullion. 

Quotes Mitchell's Words.

The judge advocate quoted from the record of Col. Mitchell's testimony, declaring: "We submit the record shows the accused had ample opportunity to correct the charges and did not." He further said that Mr. Reid, on the first occasion this matter was brought up, did not attempt to straighten it out. 

Mr. Reid then arose and said: "This shows how far afield one's mind can go. He's deliberately violated the rules of this court when he attempts to impose something on it which was ruled out weeks ago. I can excuse him, though.  

"He has not shown there is one iota of evidence that Col. Mitchell has perjured himself. He doesn't say the things in the book are not true. He's trying to try out a copyright suit. It makes no difference where the material came from. He produces a witness who has given lectures before the
Army and Navy War College, and as such they are material available for the world. 

"I would like to have them placed in the record. They absolutely and conclusively prove that submarines could do great damage in the Pacific and that Hawaii is defenseless.

Decries Unfairness.

"He makes a big hullabaloo about the book. If he was fair, he would have read from another page which says: 'This little book has been thrown together hastily. It is compiled from testimony and evidence given to Congress and from articles which have appeared in public journals.' What issues in this case require this matter to be brought up at this time? I respectfully submit that it is impertinent and I object."

Maj. Gullion responded in a low, soft voice, saying he would leave to the court the matter of whether any personal remarks directed at him by Mr. Reid should remain in the record. 

Dead silence reigned in the court as the law member deliberated on his opinion for a moment. He then said:

"To go into a consideration of this subject might take a few hours or several days. The questions of authorship and plagiarism are one of the most difficult I know. I don't think the court wants to bring this matter in at this time. The objection is sustained."

Assails Gullion. 

A hum and buzz was heard among the spectators, broken only by Maj. Gullion who wanted to examine the witness further on his lectures. Mr. Reid objected, and Maj. Gullion withdrew, but he succeeded in getting the book, "Winged Defense," into the record. As the case was about to proceed Col. Herbert A. White, military defense counsel, arose from an obscure corner and declared Maj. Gullion, after having been overruled twice on a question, still attempted to follow it up, and therefore was guilty of contempt of court. 

Col. Winship thought there were no grounds for such a charge, and Mr. Reid announced he would concur in the ruling of the law member. Peace then was restored and Gen. Patrick was called to the stand.

The remark of Gen. McCoy at the outset of the session was made while Mr. Reid was cross-examining Lieut. Col. Joseph A. Baer in charge of the troop training section of the Army general staff, who was continuing the stand this morning from yesterday evening. Col. Baer was giving in detail the reasons why the General Service School at Fort Leavenworth. Kans., rejected a manual on airplane tactics prepared by Gen. Patrick. Mr. Reid pressed the witness for a "yes or no" answer to his question if the school concurred in the Patrick report.

Reid Is Irritated.

The witness replied he thought Mr. Reid did not understand the matter, which irritated the counsel considerably. At this stage Gen. McCoy declared:

"The court has a duty here to advise the defense that his manner of cross-examination is somewhat objectionable. At least, it is to me. Not only with this witness, but with other witnesses. I would like the court to consider if the defense should be advised how to conduct his cross-examination."

"I would like to have the law member advise me how I cross-examine," snapped back Mr. Reid. 

"The cross-examination shouldn't be offensive, but still I think you have a right to examine closely," remarked Col. Winship.

Gen. McCoy said there was nothing the matter with the cross-examination, as he thought it was "keen," but "the manner is offensive." 

Reid Defends Course.

Mr. Reid said he was within his rights to drive the point home. "The witness here tells me what I know and what I don't know. The only proper way is the bear down on the point they try to evade."

Lieut. Col. I. McMullen, assistant trial judge advocate, entered the controversy with this statement: "As I understand it the defense is trying to get the point out of the witness that the War Department had the audacity to disagree with the Air Service. I'll stipulate the fact as well as other instances where the department disagreed with other branches."

Gen. Graves broke in at this point, declaring: "Under paragraph 201 of the manual I think Gen. McCoy's point is sound that it is the function of the court and not the law member to notify the defense in this case."

President Howze, seeing the matter taking on a forum discussion, finally settled the question by declaring:

"I feel Mr. Reid can proceed with the method of cross-examining, having in the mind, however, the precaution that has been voiced in this discussion by the court. I would like to see the case proceed."

Answers Question. 

The question finally was answered by Col. Baer, who said the school concurred in some parts of the manual and other parts it did not. Then, in response to questions from Mr. Reid, he detailed the workings of the general staff with respect to Air Service matters. Aviation questions are referred to flying members or attaches of the staff, and if the question then is not settled the chief of the service is called in. 

Maj. Gen. Mason M. Patrick, chief of the Army Air Service, was called as a rebuttal witness in connection with charges by Col. Mitchell of the danger attached to certain types of Army planes. He declared he did not consider the DH or JN type "inherently dangerous," and that if he knew his officers had to fly unsafe planes he would "take it up with the designer."

"What action would you take if it came to your knowledge that an officer had been permitted to fly a plane known to be dangerous?" Col. Moreland asked him. 

The general replied that no airplane is altogether safe, but in this particular case he would take "the most drastic action I could devise."

Defend General Staff.

Three lieutenant colonels of the Army general staff defended that organization against the charges of "incompetency" made by Col. Mitchell yesterday afternoon. The first to testify, Lieut. Col. H. E. Bullis, in charge of reserves, sought to "clarify" the deplorable condition among reserve pilots as painted by witnesses for the defense by declaring it would close the United States $28,000,000 a year to give this class of pilots weekly hour training as recommended by Air Service witnesses. He further declared $775,000 for reserve training use in the fiscal year 1927, but the budget director was unwilling to go above $200,000.

Lieut. Col. Joseph A. Baer of the troop training section of the staff testified the air officers at headquarters here had been "unable" to write a service manual on the tactical use of aircraft; that the one they had prepared had been held "basically unsound" and that, although the manual was ordered revised in 1921, it had only recently reached the printers' hands. The colonel, in answer to a question by the trial judge advocate, said "Gen. Mitchel" had been assistant chief of the Air Service during much of the time the manual was under revision. 

Lieut Col. E. N. Caldwell, attached to the Staff as a reservist, was unable to make any headway with his testimony about National Guard units, owing to the constant objections of defense counsel. The prosecution finally yielded to the demands of the defense that Col. Caldwell produce certain documents and records on which he had based his testimony.