Evening star., 1925-11-13
Holds Testimony Irrelevant.

The testimony given by Mrs L.ans-
downe was immaterial, irrelevant. in
competent. improper and had no pos
stble influence on the alleged offense
at the time ii was committed. AS for
counsel's remark regarding the Con-
srItution, ! don't think a reply is
necessary. If this testimony should
not come to this court. neither should
!; go to the reviewing authority. If
the court has erred in accepting evi-
dence, then the confirming authority
has power to disapprove the findings
and protect the rights of the accused.
Il repeat my motion, that all of Mrs.
Lansdowne'S testimony be stricken
from the record"
Col. Winship, the court law member
with evident hesitation, recommended
to the court that the prosecutions mo-
ton be overruled. Maj Gen. Benjamin
a. Poore announced that he did not.
concur in the legal opinion of the law
member. and thereupon the court with
drew for a five minute executive con-
ference. Upon returning 1t was an
nounced that the court had decided to
accept the recomme ndation Of the law
member and that the motion to strike
out Mrs. Lansdownes testimony there
fore was overruled.
The first witness following the
argument over Mrs. Lansdownes s
testimony was Col. J. Edward Cas-
sidy of this city, a reserve officer of
the Chemical Warfare division of the
Army, who qualified himself as an ex
pert on chemical warfare. Under ques-
tioning by Representative Reid, he
said that he was chief engineer of
the 92d Division overseas and was
commander of the Corps of Engineers
with the list Army Division through
@
turned to the United States in March,
1919, and became executive officer in
the Office of the chief of engineers, re-
tanning that post until 1920, when he
left the service.
He said that he had made study
of chemical warfare for combat op-
erations, had made a study Of all in
formation available on the subject, had
conferred with officers of the Army
and civilian experts on the matter and
had frequently lectured on the sub
ject. He testified that he served at
the front for three months during the
World War when gas operations were
being put into effect on a small scale.
Witness Qualified.
The witness then was tested as to
his knowledge as to the vehicle used
for carrying such gases into the en-
emy territory, when Col. sherman
AIoreland, trial judge advocate, inter
posed to ask the purpose of the line
of questioning. Then Representative
Reid directly qualified the witness by
asking:
Are you prepared to state from
your observations and study what
amount Of gas it takes to cause the
evacuation Of a certain area?"
When the witness replied in the
affirmative Representative Reid pro-
duced the statements of Gen. Drum
before a congressional committee in
which the Army officer stated that
to gas an area the size Of the District
of Columbia would take 3,439, $50
pounds of mustard gas to cause a
concentration, or 9,573.850 pounds of
mustard gas to cause an evacuation
of the area.
Mr.. Reid asked II this was correct
or incorrect, and he replied that the
statements were absolutely incorrect.
He then was turned over to the prose-
cution for cross-examination. When
Col. Moreland asked him If he had
read a certain book approved by
Cen Amos A, Fries, chief Of the