Evening star., 1925-09-07
Col. Mitehell's Insubordination

Col. Mitehell's Insubordination.
A more fragrant case of insubordina-
ton than that Of Col. Mitchell of the
Army Air Service in his public criti-
cism and denunciation of the War
and Navy Departments in respect to
aviation policy and practice has prob
ably never before occurred in the his
tory Of the American military estab
lishment. 1t is the more reprehensible
because of its deliberation. No mis-
chance has actuated it, This Officer.
only recently rebuked and by demo-
ton punished for a similar offense,
eXcoriation OF his own Army su-
periors. but to extend his remarks to
those of another branch of the ma
tional defensive force. Though he does
not so specify. he in effect rebukes
and challenges the President OF the
United States, who as commander in
chief is finally responsible for the acts
and performances of the heads of the
two departments.
If any civilian subordinate officia!
in any branch Of the Government were
thus to quarrel publicly with the
policies and practices of his immedi-
ate superiors he would be promptly
dismissed, or at the least his resisna.
ton would be demanded. The case is
worse when military officer parades
IL -:
is sworn to obedience of orders. He is
bound by an age-long tradition to ac-
cept as final the judgment of those
who are by law vested with authority
over his acts and his public express
sions.
1t matters not at all if Col
Mitchell's criticism of the aviation
policy of the Government is correct
He is insubordinate, and he knows it.
He vaunts his insubordination, de-
pends upon it for a martrydom which
he deliberately invites. A more honor
able course would have been for him
to resign his military commission
and, as a civilian with experience to
warrant his pronouncement of judg.
ment, to undertake a campaign to
cause change of national and de.
partmental policy.
AS subordinate officer Of the Army
Col. Mitchell has no right to condemn
gratuitously in public the acts of his
superiors and of the heads of another
branch of the service. AS civilian
he would have a perfect right to en-
gage in an agitation to bring about
reform, to create a national aviation
service not governed by either Army
or Navy, but contributing to the ef-
ficiency of both.
The immediate question confronting
the Secretary of War is whether to
accommodate Col. Mitchell In his de-
sire to be pilloried in punishment in
order to make a national issue of the
aviation policy of the Government.
Obviously if he is not brought to book
for his present broadside of attack he
will continue. He cannot well offend
more grievously than he has in this
instance. If he is permitted to scold
moralize the service. Discipline will
be weakened, insubordination encour.
aged. The issue will not be evaded.
Respect for the essential principle
OF military organization, obedience of
orders and silent acceptance of au.
thority, demands that this recalcitrant
officer be placed whe~z II homo. aa
should be if he proposes to continue
as a critic, outside OF the service, d
free agent Of agitation, untrammelled
by discipline and unhampered by Of
fetal ties and duties.
All this is quite apart from the
merits of the controversy. Every word
OF Col. Mitchelrs pronouncement may
he true, every accusation justified,
every suggestion sound. There is
decided public feeling that he is right,
and that the Government aviation
policy should be amended, whether a
separate air establishment be created
or not. Assuredly the subject will be
debated in Congress at the next ses-
sion and, whether Col. Mitchell re
mains in the military service or not,
there may be dehnitive and reforma-
tory action. For the present the ques-
ton Of urgency is whether an officer
Of the Army can with in,n.aity-
even for the purpose of gaining
n1artrydom to advance his end
Hout authority, ridicule superiors and
even, in effect, impeach the President
Of the United States for incompetence.
Much as Col. Mitchell's courage
may be admired, he nevertheless
stands forth as a poor examplar of
fidelity. He may be rendering the
county a service, but he is, perhaps
consciously and deliberately. soiling
record Of good soldiership and dis
crediting his chosen profession by his
gross breach Of discipline