The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1884-07-28

authority could lead to such accusation have IN,
variably declined to be interviewed these subjects
and anything that may have been published CON
trary to the foregoing repudate But in the news
papers you have called my attention to one question
on which your structures written. There is moth
ing authorizing what you claim There is import
ant fact connected with this question which you disre
gard. Before the first expedition started, the whole
plan embracing depots their size number and loca-
1888 with the entire scheme for three years and the
rescue afterwards, carefully elaborated and re-
dueed to complete plan. Being Greelys expedition,
it proper he should prepare all those instructions,
which he did. So far as could be seen the plan was
faultless, and it approved.
After reaching his arctic station, Greedy wrote out.
with great care, plan for the two relieving ships of
1882 and 1885, that is the work of Beebee and Gar
hngton, embracing plan of rescue more complete
and differing somewhat from the first one ending with
these words No deviation from these instructions
should be permitted Latitude of action should not
be given to party who known coast are search.
ing for men who know their plans and orders. =
Greedy was the spot and the proper person to
make this plan of rescue, and the only Prearranged
one there could be. There but one thing to do
and that plainly and simply to carry it out This
was literally done BY myself Beebee and Darlington,
and fully responsible for it up to the sinking OF
the ship
For doing this you attempt to hold me culpable.
This is what I have always said, and there is
not shadow of reflection upon Greedy, nor
has there been any attempt to shift the response
bility to any This shows that in everything
done relating to depots and the selection of Little
ton island, instead of Cape Sabine depot,
and the intention to land depot on the return
of the vessel in it did not reach Greedy and not
on the way up, all in exact accordance with those
plans, and in them there room for discretion
The depos upon the route established so far as
the boats reached just agreed upon to locality,
the quantity and kind of stores.
There is not shadow of reflection upon Greedy In
this nor upon any one, and in publishing your letter
you have entirely misrepresented me- There never
carefully elaborated, panstaking and con
scientous plan for work than this both by Greedy and
myself, and there could be where prearranged
plan upon which everything must depend was adhered
to with greater fidelity Nothing could induce me to
reflect upon Greedy but, the contrary the greatest
praise is due him. In reviewing the past all men see
much they wish had been different. This covers all
you, or any one, can Justly say in criticism.
Before leaving Washington Greedy impressed upon
me- as forcibly as any man could, and rightly the
absolute necessity OF supporting him literally IN the
way we had prearranged, as he might direct after
reaching his station saying strong influence would be
brought to have the plans changed just as there have
been. The responsibility under my direction ended
with the sinking of the Proteus, and Lieut.. Garling
tons conduct up to that time had been perfectly ETH
Gent A welrecognized custom of the service makes
it improper for Darlington myself to publicly dis
cuss the action of the court of inquiry This rule
equally applies to the counsel Of BOTH does it cal
for great astuteness see the light Of past events
wherein the plans might have been better at first SC
to hold to personal account commander who is in
battle in obedience of duty has drawn the fire of the
enemy by his well directed volleys, from which
brave men were killed. Your efforts seem to be Of
this nature. fail to see any sufficient reason fol
your writing the letter to which this reply, il
your becoming my accuser when you become CARING
toms counsel. w. 3. HAzEN.