Martinsburg herald. [volume] (Martinsburg, W. Va.) 1881-1920, 1898-12-03
THE WAR OF THE RIVALS
Admiral Sampson Discusses the
Surrender Of Santiago.
ADMIRAL SAYS He WAS sNUBBBD

General Shaftct Pcremptorily Refus-
ed 10 Permit the Naval Commander
TO Participate In the Surrender of
General rorai and His Forces.
Washington. Dec. 1.-The navy de-
partment yesterday made public re-
port from Admiral Sampson covering
the operations of the United states
blockadinr feet off Santiago after the
( destruction rs ~ervera's squadron. The
/ report begins with dispatch dated
! from the flagship New York, July 10,
and winds UP with one from the same
| flagship dated Guantanamo, Aug. 4. In
/ the first report Admiral Sampson tells
! Of the demonstration made against
\ Aguadores by the Michigan troops UNI
I der Dufield, the point Of which was
/ that as soon as the ships took part In
| the firing tho Spaniards disappeared.
| He says that the bombardment of SAN
/ tiago on the "a Of July served no par
! tieular end. because Skaters attack
/ had been postponed. He quotes dis
patches from himself TO Shafter stat
/ ing that II is Impossible to force an
! entrance to the harbor until the mines
| had been removed, and that work could
/ be accomplished only after the troops
had taken the forts.
shafter replied that he could not tell
when he could take the batteries. IL
! they were as difficult as those against
| which ne was nitted it would take
some time and a great loss Of life. Says
| he: II am at loss to see why the
navy cannot work under a destructive
! fire as we'll as the army, My loss yes
! terday was over 500 men, BY all means
keep up fire on everything in sight until
! demolished. l expect. however, with
! time and sufficient men to capture the
forts along the bay"
After the battle with Cervera's fleet
! Shafter renewed his request that Samp-
4 son force an entrance, saying his pres
ent position had cost him a thousand
men, and he did not wish to lose any
more Sampson in comment says this
shows complete misrepresentation of
| the circumstances. He alleges that the
sinking of the Mercedes would obstruct
the entrance of the larger American
/ ships and that extensive shore bat
! teries were known to exist His chief
of staff had indicated to Shafter the
points that should be carried before any
attention was paid to the city. and the
taking of these points would have in
sured the destruction of the mines and
the entrance of the American fleet.
Says Sampson: Il have been sur
rrised to see published in the papers
any statement of refusal on my part
to endeavor to force my way into the
harbor. and cannot understandable case
the newspaper report be a truthful
statement sent by him-Shafter's send
ing any report of this kind.
bara x,onraovar would ap7111a Divert
upon the apparently extraordinary
openness which every detail of hope,
effort or suggestion on the part of the
army has been published. The I'M
| wisdom of such procedure Is too
manifest for discussion.
THE navy has been placed in such
an invidious and false position before
the country through the very unwise
| publication of General Skaters tele-
grams that / think this matter should
In some way be made clear to the pub
lic.''
Admiral Sampson gives a number of
dispatches showing that he was asked
| to participate in the terms of surrender
and tried to find out when he should
send a representative, but owing to
one or two delays no time was fixed.
| Sampson comments as follows:
THE foregoing certainly shows clear
\ ly the most absolute joint. action, and
took for granted that we should be
| joint signatories of any capitulations,
as is customary in all services in such
circumstances Captain Chadwick ar
rived at the front at the earliest hour
1t was possible for him to do so and
informed General Shafter of my ex-
rectancy in the matter, but General
Shafter peremptorily refused. The
convention had already been signed,
and he stated as one reason that moth
ing had been said Of the army in my
report Of the fleet action of July 8.
Referring to General Skaters failure
to invite any of the squadron officials
to be present at the surrender Adj
miral Sampson says:
This, of course, may have been a
mere oversight. but il is of course, to
be regretted that any such thing should
take place. Had the navy been with
drawn after the action of the 3d-after
which all the fleets operations were
to aid the. army-all the shipping re-
ferred to would have escaped. and our
army have become the Sbesieged in
stead of the besiegers."
Skaters rejoinder was in substance
as follows:
Il do not acknowledge the authority
of the secretary of the navy in the
matter in which you wire me. The
surrender of Santiago was made to me
by General Toral in person. Neither
General Tforal or myself signed the ar
ticles. Certainly ] could not and would
not permit these articles to any Of
fioer's signature. my own not being
affixed, and l shah protest to the sec
rotary Of war against your signature
to that document. No claim for any
credit for the capture of Cervera and
his fleet has been made by the army.
although it is fact that the Spanish
feet did not leave the harbor until the
investment Of the city was practically
completed
Sampson says that he acknowledged
the receipt of the above without argu-
ment, and that the matter should be
decided at Washington.
To Investigate state OnicfaIs.