Evening star., 1949-11-30
Arnold Articles Seen
Reopening Fight Over
Removal Of DenfeId
Yelled Attack on Vinson
Won't Be Overlooked by
Committee in Congress
By David La,crence

Articles appearing in various
newspapers throughout the coun-
try under the signature of Gen,
Fl. H. Arnold, retired head of the
U. S. Army Air Forces, have re-
opened the controversy over the
the removal of Admiral Denfeld as
Chief of Naval Operations.
For several weeks 1t had been
believed that a new spirit of har-
mony was being ushered in among
the members of the armed serv-
ices. No public statements of a
controversial nature have been
made by any Of the spokesmen
for the armed services.
Now Gen. Arnold, in effect,
accuses Admiral Denfeld of dis
loyalty and warns congressman
that they must not seek to pro-
tect their witnesses from punish
ment for expressing their views
in the future if those witnesses
happen to be asked before con-
gressional committees to testify.
The veiled attack which the
general makes on Chairman Vim
son and other members Of the
House committee who expressed
disapproval of the custer of Ad-
miral Denfeld probably will not
60 unnoticed by the committee.
Different From Speeches.
Gen. Arnold's articles are writ
ten in style that appears to
be different from his speeches and
statements Of the past, and it is
to be assumed that a document
of such Importance could hardly
be publicized without the knowl-
edge of some important officers
in the U. S. Air Force not on re-
tired duty. There is paragraph
in the first Arnold article which
could conceivably result in a de-
cision on the part of Admiral Dem
field to decline the post OF Com
mander of American naval forces
in the Eastern Atlantic, which has
been offered him, and to retire
instead. For if the charge of dis
loyalty made by Gen. Arnold
against Admiral Denfeld is &C
cepted as true. then the admiral
is really disqualified from ever
holding a post of responsibility in
the naval service, The paragraph
reads as follows:
I'm civil life. If a man in a
responsible position shows he is
not in accord with the principles
and doctrines of his firm or COM
pany, he is thrown out. maybe
politely. or. perhaps roughly, at
once. Judging by some congress
sional reactions to the relief OF
Admiral Denfeld. he should have
been kept on his job, regardless
Of how he felt with regard to our
approved laws. policies. principles
Of carrying on war and the views
of his superiors. He should be
kept on the job just because he
appeared before Congress as a
witness. Are we to understand,
then, that loyalty In a commercial
firm is Of q higher standard than
In Our armed forces? I do not
believe the people of the United
States want this type OF organiza-
ton in our armed services"
Admiral Denfeld did not dissent
from the approved laws of the
Nation. He did not disobey any
command from his superiors in
expressing his views at the invi-
tation of Congress. He was
given permission to testify. and
the House Armed Services Com
mittee was specifically notified by
the Secretary of Defense, Louis
johnson, that this permission had
been granted and that no wit
nesses would be ir1timidated or
told what to say on the witness
stand.
Rule in a Democracy.
There is nothing in the uniflca-
ton law at present on the statute
books which gives the U. S. Joint
Chiefs of Staff power to require
each of its three members to hold
only those views which two-to-
one majority of the Joint Chiefs
may prescribe. The three armed
services are still coordinate in
rank and Congress alone can be
called the true "superiors''' of the
armed services in making policy
with respect to appropriations.
The Constitution gives, the Con-
gress the right to make all rules
for the government of land and
naval forces. It Is on the opera
tional side, when once appropria-
tions and broad policies have
been fixed by Congress, that the
only superior" who can issue
orders to members. Of the Joint
Chiefs comes into the picture and
that superior" Is the Com
mander- in Chief Of the Army and
Navy. Admiral Denfeld never
had a conference with the Pres
ident on these matters nor was
he told what he could or could
not say to Congress.
To accuse an outstanding naval
officer like Admiral Denfeld of
disloyalty just because he doesn't
happen to agree with the views
of another armed service is to
make grave error, and it is most
regrettable that fine man like
Gen. Arnold should have allowed
himself to be put in that position
by those who evidently counseled
him on what to say.
II the Arnold doctrine is cor
rect, then Secretary Symington
should not now be holding Office.
For last year he went over the
head of the then Secretary Of
Defense, the late James Forrestal,