2. I sincerely regret that statements were repeatedly made by officers of the Institution that the Langley machine was flown in 1914 “with certain changes of the machine necessary to use pontoons,” without mentioning the other changes included in Dr. Wright’s list.
3. I point out that Assistant Secretary Rathbun was misinformed when he stated that the Langley machine “without modification” made “successful flights.”
4. I sincerely regret the public statement by officers of the Institution that “The tests” (of 1914) showed “that the late Secretary Langley had succeeded in building the first aeroplane capable of sustained free flight with a man.”
5. Leaving to experts to formulate the conclusions arising from the 1914 tests as a whole, in view of all the facts, I repeat in substance, but with amendments, what I have already published in Smithsonian Scientific Series, Vol. 12, 1932, page 227:
The flights of the Langley aerodrome at Hammondsport in 1914, having been made long after flying had become a common art, and with changes of the machine indicated by Dr. Wright’s comparison, as given above, did not warrant the statements published by the Smithsonian Institution that these tests proved that the large Langley machine of 1903 was capable of sustained flight carrying a man.
6. If the publication of this paper should clear the way for Dr. Wright to bring back to America the Kitty Hawk machine to which all the world awards first place, it will be a source of profound and enduring gratification to his countrymen everywhere. Should he decide to deposit the plane in the United States National Museum, it would be given the highest place of honor, which is its due.
Publication of this statement in the Smithsonian Annual Report presumably should mark the end of the long controversy.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Note that the two families spelled the same name differently.
[2] Owned years afterward by Orville Wright.