Evening star., 1925-09-09
MITCHELL CHARGE DENIED.
Air Service Has Widest Latitude OF
ANY Branch, Officers Say.

While Col. George A. Nugent, spe-
cial investigator of the War Depart
ment, was enroute today TO San An
tonic to ask Col. William Mitchell II
he made the statement published sun
day morning that administration OF
the Army and Navy air services had
been criminally negligent, department
officials took occasion to deny en-
phatically that mon flying officers In
the Army had sent aviators to their
death"
The Army Air Service today enjoys
more freedom and latitude in the con-
duct of it's duty than any other branch
of the War Department. it was de-
clared The creation of a separate
corps, as advocated by Senator Btng-
ham of Connecticut, could give the
air service little more than 1t has
already. AS far as the department
officials know, the only complaint of
| the flyers is for a separate promotion
list. That has not been given official
consideration as yet.
Officers Deny Negligence.
Although the department in its pro-
| ceedings against Col. Mitchell for his
remarks about the conduct of the two
| air services will not consider their
truth or falSity, officers in authority
today expressed the opinion that Col.
Mitchers charges were in the main
directed against the Navy, as far as
specific instances and illustrations
were concerned. They emphasized that
| there is no criminal negligence" on
| the part of the War Department in
! conducting affairs of its Air Service,
because that body is allowed to work
| out it's own problems.
| The pilots are in the Air Service and
| the ''non-fiyers" do not profess to
know anything about the details of
| their work because they are not train
| ed along that line. The only time the
| War Department steps in on an Air
| Service activity is to consider a large
project, where more angles than ordi-
| nary flying are involved. it was de
| clared. officers illustrated this state.
| ment with the world flight project
| Mai. Gen. Mason NJ. Patrick. chief OF
| the Air Service, presented the plan to
| the department and it was approved.
| When approval was given, the depart
| ment told the Air Service to work out
| the problem itself. The question of
| other necessities for the flight was
| taken care of entirely by the air off
| GERS.
Other Charges Denied.
| Col. Mitchell's statement mentioned
the anti-aircraft activity of the War
| Department and also charged that
efforts were being concentrated or
| plans to take away the flying pay OF
air officers. The departments answer
! to these two charges IS that. II 1t did
not undertake to develop anti-aircraft
as a means of defense, it would be
'criminally negligent" The question
| of flying pay, ii was declared, has not
even been discussed with a view to a
decision. From time to time there
have been various proposals for in.
surance plus pay or insurance in lieu
| of pay. The object Of the ased
compensation-50 per cent of the ba Sc
pay--is to enable the flyers to make
ample provision for their families in
case of accident but some officials are
not sure that the additional pay is
being utilized in that manner.
The anti-aircraft development work
of the War Department does not meet
with the approval of Col. Mitchell and
the majority of air officers in both
Army and Navy Air Services. Their
argument is that aircraft is the only
defense against aircraft. The row
started during the aircraft investiga-
ton last Winter when Brig. Gen.
Hugh A. Drum, representing the gen
eral staff declared he could defend