The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-01-24
WAS IT SCHLEY
OR WAS 1T SAMPSON WHO DE-
sTROYED THE SPANISH FLEET.
Senator's wrestling with the Guess
uon Recently Raised by Represen-
tative Berry In witty Verse.
LIVELY EXECUTIVE SESSION
"JUMPING" OF HEROES OVER HEADS
OF OTHERS DISCUSSED,
And All Documents Relating to ADJ
Vancement of Naval officers Called
For without Division.
-A
SCHLEY'S FRIENDS WARNED
THAT AN INVESTIGATION MIGHT
HURT THEIR HERO's CAUSE.
Spirited Debate I'm the Senate on the
Proposed Annexation of the
FlI,fIfnufna VaIou.ys
And All Documents Relating to Ad-
For without Division.
SCHLEY'S FRIENDS WARNED
THAT AN INVESTIGATION MTGHT
HURT THEIR HERO'S CAUSE.
Spirited Debate I'm the senate on the
Proposed Annexation of the
Philippine Islands.


WASHINGTON, Jan. 23.-The entire ex-
ecutive session of the Senate to-day was de-
voted wholly to the discussion of the pro-
motion of Admirals Sampson and Schley ana
other naval officers engaged in the Santiago
campaign over the heads of officers who
were their superiors in rank. The contro-
yersy was then postponed for twenty days
after vote had been taken to call for the
records of the Navy Department bearing on
the conduct of all affected by the advances
ment. The discussion arose over the resolu-
tion, of which Senator Butler was the au.
thor, calling for these documents. AS orig
inally offered, it asked for the reasons for
the advancement, but the resolution was
modified so as to request the record only.
The first vote on a motion made by
Senator Hale to lay the resolution on the
table, and on this the ayes and noes were
taken, resulting: Ayes, IL noes, 35 The
resolution was then allowed to pass without
further division
For three hours previous to this, however,
the Senate had been engaged in a very ani@
mated verbal battle, which involved many
intricacies and was participated in by a!
large number of senators. The main con-
tests were, first, over the general policy of
were characterized as quite as deserving.
though less fortunate in that they were de-
prived of such active participation in the
war, and, second, as to the relative merits
OF Sampson and Schley. Senators Gormam
and Wellington, of Maryland, one a Repub-
ican and the other Democrat united in
fierce attack on the Navy Department for
favoring Sampson over Schley, while SEN
ators Lindsay, Pettigrew, Perkins ana
Money attacked the whole system of promo-
tion as "a species of favoritsm which was
not warranted by the facts" The method
of the administration was defended by
Messrs. Hale, Chandler and Lodge
JEALOUS FOR sCHLEY.
Senator Wellington was especially zeal~
Gus in his advocacy of the claims of ADJ
miral Schley and in his presentation OF
reasons why Admiral Sampson should not
be preferred over him. and both he and
his Democratic colleague, Mr. German.
made the statement that if the official
papers were ordered they would demons
strate beyond a possible question the fact
that Schley and not Sampson fought the
battle off Santiago. They contended that
with Sampson ten miles away he could not
be accredited constructively with having
command of the fleet on the memorable day
bottom. On the contrary they held that
Schley was on the ground he was the
senior officer, and that he was engaged
actively and most effectively in the conflict
all the world knew, regardless Of the
favors of the government at Washington.
Senator Lindsay found much in the pro-
motion of both Schley and Sampson over
Commodore Watson to condemn. He took
occasion to praise Watson as a man who
undoubtedly would have made fine record
in the war if given the opportunity he
should have had as senior officer. and said to-
deprive him of his rightfu rank because
other men were pressed to the front and
given the posts of honor was in every way
unfair and unworthy of a great country
Senator Perkins, Senator Platt, of Com
necticut, and Senator Pettigrew also crit-
icised the system as one liable to result in
unfairness unless very cautiously entered
upon, agreeing that at any rate the Senate
should have the record before it that it
might decide for itself as to the merits
of the men so signally favored compared
with those who had received none of the
loaves and fishes.
Senators Hale and Chandler, both mem-
bers of the naval committee. defended the
action of the Navy Department in giving
preference to the men who took upon them
selves the brunt Of the battle in Atlantic
waters and in preferring the man who was
in command of the fleet They deprecated
the opening up of controversy which SEN
ator Chandler said might lead to a condi-
tion which might prove unsavory as that
which the war investigating commissions
had developed in connection with the army
beef contracts. Senator Lodge joined in
deploring the policy, and owing to the facr
that he had but recently in the interest of
private research made an exhaustive in
vestigation, he was enabled to throw much
light upon the controversy in behalf of the
contention that the controversy should not
be stirred.
HINT TO sCHLEY'S FRIENDS.
During the presentation Of this side much
, said IN uphoding the claims of Samp-
in preference 90 those of Schley, and
friends of the latter officer were
armed that if they insisted upon pressing
the investigation too closely some facts
would be developed that would not be-
agreeable to them" The charge was mads
that Sehley had voluntarily left Santiago
after reaching the vicinity OF that port and
after Cervera had entered the harhor. and
also the charge that when the Spanish fleet
had sailed out through the narrow mouth
OF the channel, Admiral (theu comnlodore)
Schley had made reverse movement with
the Brooklyn and gone in direction op-
posite to that taken by the Spanish squad-
ron, instead of boldly attacking the enemy
in the beginning. Ii was asserted that these
facts were among those which the archives
would reveal
The friends OF Admiral Schley declared
they had nothing to fear from having all
the facts known. Explaining his start to