Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1925-12-22

officer is always responsible for the
safe conduct of his ship. But 1t is
cont ended that in such case as tina
OF the loss of the Shena ndoah the re
sponsibility of the comma ndinR offi-
Ger terminates at some particular
point. Such A point must have been
that when everything known to man
kind had been resorted 10 in the effort
to save the ship. lndisputable evil
dence shows that such was the ca Sc
and that in spite of heroic measures
taken. the disaster could not have
been averted. The category then. into
which the Shenandoah must fall, is
thai Of inevitable Accident"
ComCir. Rosenda hi pledged the united
support Of the survivors to the rigid
airship. expressed their faith in its
naval and commercial future and
urged the court 10 recommend the re-
tention. continue ton and furt here nee
OF rigid airship development and oper
alton in the Navy.
The court is composed Of Re ar Ad-
miral Hilary r. Jones. chairman of tho
executive committee Of the Navy Cen
eral Board: Capt. Lewis r. Mcbride.
Construction Corps. and Comdr. j. II.
Towers Of the Bureau Of .teronautics.
When the court adjourned Admira !
Jones said the tribunals goal was to
render decision by the first ri the
new wear The scope of the investiga-
ton WIS to examine into all Circum-
stances Of the disa ster. determine da M
age Of property. injuries 10 personnel
and responsibility for the accident If
any. The findings will he forwarded
to the Judge advocate general Of the
Navy nd thence to Secretary Wilbur
Seeks TO Refufe Mitchell
Comdr RosendahI sought to refute
testimony given by Col. William
Mitchell: Mai. Frank Kennedy and
Capt. c. r. clark both of the Army
Air Service: Chief Petty Officer J. II.
Collier. n survivor. and Capt. Anton
Heinen. German diriCihIe expert
Comdr. Rosendahl rhara cteriZed Col.
Mitchell's testimony as being OF NO
I value and said that for the survivors
TO examine him would he 'unneces-
sary as well as futile Parts OF Maj.
kennedvs testimony were declared
| absurd" by the officer. and Capt
Clark's examination. he added. re-
vealed nothing except his own value
less, groundless opinions, and his testi-
monv may he dropped entirely from
consideration" The testimony OF Col
lier should not carry much weight. the
officer continued. because the witness
| did not awaken from sleep until the
ship had broken in two and therefore
he could not have had a good under
sta nding of the cause.
! OF Capt. Heinens testimony Comdr
! Rosendahl said il was very apparent
! that great many Of his statements
made before the court were in the
heat of pa ssion and had for their oh
/ ject that of sustaining certain theories
! that occurred to him and from which
not even the cold facts could cause
him 10 recede."
I.ansdowne Favored Delay.
After detailing the entire cor
| respondence leading to the fatal
flight. Comdr. Eosendahl declared
Lieut.. Comdr. I.ansdowne had at no
time protested the Mid West fight
for the first week Of September, but
did express a preference for the sec
ond week on the grounds of provid-
ing additional time for prepare ton
Of Ia nding facilities along the pro.
posed route.
The comma ndine officer Of the
dirisible had no concrete fear Of the
| weather even in the latter part Of
August. the senior survivor added.
IF by inference. insinuation or 9TH
erwise. 1t could he established that
Lieut.. Comdr. Lansdowne actually
feared the weather of the first week
of September declared Comdr.
Rosendahl. land that fearing such.
he failed to make proper representa-
| tons of such apprehensions. the
| logical conclusion that inevitably
| must be reached is that Lieut.. Comdr.
Lansdowne. in view of the ella sticity
of his orders. willfully and knowingly
| ha Zarded his ship and jeopa rdiZed the
lives of the AZ others of his crew
| by starting at the time he did"
/ ITO believe them" he continued,
/ ''as one must. should he he con-
! WINGED of the alleged reluctance of
Lieut.. Comdr. Lansdowne to carry out
! the fight as ordered that such an Off
: Ger would jeopardize his crew and his
ship willfully and knowingly, not only
| approaches the heights of ahsurdity.
! hut SANDERS the dead
Cites Precautions Taken.
Comdr Rosendahl then cited numer-
Gus precautions taken by Comdr
| Lansdowne to safeguard the ship and
concluded with this statement: 1T is.
therefore. manifestly evident that he
did not knowingly and willfully sub
! ject his ship and his crew to certain
disaster. Likewise. it il manifestly
not reasonable in any light to draw
! the conclusion that it was with any
! marked feeling of doubt, reluctance
or unncertainty that the commanding
/ officer Of the Shenandoah embarked
on the flight of September. 1926"
Comdr. Rosendahl defended the re-
F, duction in safety valves. which has
| been charged by some airmen as be
! ing the cause of the disaster. He de-
| clared the valve installation was ade-
auate for any conditions encountered
! and cannot be considered to have
| been a contributing cause to the loss
| Of the airship." He likewise defended
| the removal OF one engine, explain
| ing that it had been replaced by a
| radio set OF much less weight.
Referring to parachutes. the officer
declared that though practically every
person aboard was aware of the seri-
| business of the situation, there has
not been mentioned in a single in
stance any desire, intention or effort
| to use parachute for any purpose
whatsoever in this disaster. AZ q