The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1925-09-21

officials from whom facts can be
secured
The hearing drew an audience
| that packed the committee room.
| Many spectators, including women,
were forced to stand.
The crowd early showed It's SYM
pathizes for Davis defense OF the
air service.
from his prepared statement. In
almost each instance, this was in
connection with driving home the
point that air force development
was hampered by lack of appropria5
lions.
-"I want to emphasize that; we
need money and the air service
only can advance when we have
money" reiterated Davis.
Davis drew a round of approba-
ton when he fairly shouted:
"I believe the board wants sense
and not sensation; facts, not fan
cies."
The spectators. warmly applauoed
Davis when he concluded.
Major General John L. Hines,
chief Of staff, then was called to
the stand.
Opposes Unified Force
General Hines, chief of staff
Joined Davis in vigorously opposing
a separate air force with a secre-
tary in the Cabinet.
1.-THE air service can never fight
alone, but always fight in conJunc-
ton with land forces" said Hines.
"Such a department would violate
the needs for cooperation in war.
and would be neither wise from an
administrative viewpoint nor econom-
ical
'9The air service best can be de-
veloped under it's present organiZa-
ton.
statement. dwelt largely in generali-
ties, regarding the peace time or
ganization of the army.
He stressed the value or ava
ton as a patent factor in the ma
tional defense, and pledged the
fullest cooperation of the general
staff to promote air development
to the fullest possible extent.
Eyes of the Army
THE air service is one of the
major factors in every major opera
tion," said Hines.
He also extolled the value of
aircraft as the eyes" of the army.
1.-The importance Of the airplane
as a success in battle was demon
strated in the world war" he said,
but the air service should be left
undisturbed under the general staff
for no army can operate without
single command over all military
units"
THE present performance ard or.
eaniZation Of the air service haN e
been satisfactory" said Hines.
Hines pictured the air force as
somewhat weak in equipment and
personnel because Of lack of money,
but strong on performance and pos
sibilities If permitted to continue
Its slow. irresistible development
under it's present capable hands.
Sustained by Aides
Refraining. like Davis, from men
tioning Mitchell's name. Hines as
/ sailed critics of the air defense He
denied that the air arm was not in
control aof the flyers. and pointed to
flying exploits as proof Of what the
service could do in an emergency
| IN defending the country, or in
pressing an attack upon an enemv.
Practically identical views Of the
| air service were presented by Briga.
| der General Hugh A. Drum, as
| sistant chief of staff.
Drum said he could see no posi-
| bility Of Improvement over the pres
ent organization and efficiency
through unifying the air force.
| On the other hand; he declared,
it almost certainly would follow
| that the efficacy of the air unit
as a fighting and defense force
would be impaired.
| THE air service In the army
| should be separate only as the
| artillery and infantry are separate.
subject to control and direction Of
the general staff said Drum.
Quotes Pershing's Views.
Drum read a letter from General
Pershing written on the day be-
fore he retired, saying, in part:
THE air service on land should
remain an auxiliary arm and a
very important arm, available as
now for Independent use. but al
ways under the orders of the com
mander-in-chief."
That view. Drum said, still re
mains the matured judgment of the
War Department.
Drum deprecated the fight be.
tween enthusiasts of the airpla ne
and the anti aircraft gun, saying
that each, in its own sphere, was
equally important in war
1.-THE ideal mission of anti-aircraft
i, artillery is to relieve the air service
from the necessity of assuming a
. defensive role" said Drum.
Wat m cannot pelia6 nIt0D