The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1899-06-20
WOeBKS VERSION Of Il
aCMxEYr1 C0xvHMSATIOy ON THE
nnOoKLYx-s BRIDGE.
Gives HE Rec~liecsiOns ~ Ia
what Was Actually said Dur
ing the FIght on Santiago.

WASHINGTON. Juns ls-The occur-
rencss on she bridge Of the Brooklyn dur
tnG the o1fsie % July ., having been the
soojset at . controversy in the newspapers.
the navy department recently undertook m
Investigation Of the vssicsn an%safionA
Lieut. CommAAder HodgS,n and Lieut.
Commander Hsiiner. Who have figured in
shs controversy. were both called on for ex-
plantations 81 the uttefsness ATTRIBUTED 20
them and the former. wns directed - re-
part for sxan1tnAfion 6n this point 10 Capt.
Chadwick at Boston The department has
now given out for publication Capt. chad
wtek-s reDort On the matter. !, h NOT yet
osserminsd whether or not the answer Of
Lieut.. Commander Hefiner win be made
pobiic ~ this time Chadwick's report 10
- follows.
e 9 8. New rerk. Boston. Mas. June
',osr-In obedience 70 yossr orders OF the
l1th tnst. ] have TO report the following
= IT, statement OF Lieut.. Comnaander
Admirsi Srhssy and aisaseIf during ne ac-
ton Of July g. IN
He states - follows:
ain. As We go rsss :sRsSasn,ss the sp.n,,a
q tstarboarts several times 20 CApt. Cook
IN the coming tower. the admiral being
- she piatform surrounding the tower. !
coming down 70 report the POSITION Of the
Aport." The Maria Teresa VAS then haul
Nc .bss, our por, bean This nrookiyn
ADMIRAL. or At least suggested to him. that
the Texas was very clooe on our starboArd
n and that sryinG % st:rtoard you'd
ned the word 'co,lisioa. did not say
you u,ean stArb0ard." I intended him 10
nndsretAnd there uaa danger Of running
inao the Tsxas. He saad. IAN right" or
nAtin. when knew IN was going to turn
- starboard. ] suggested hacainx the star
hard engine In order 10 make 9 snaller
sut he decided aSainx that. as decreasing
sAe speed OF the turn. He did not cay.
them lthe epaniardsD already" The only
that II We turned to port We should r.;
- close that we should expose ourselves 10
torpedo attacks. / suppose he meant tor
pedo coats and replied to him that had
Lieut.. Commander Hodg-on states
he 0fd not intend TO convey In his note
h Sen sns ns e ss r. s. 3,
Post The idea that no such conoauy took
ne states. regarding this, an follows:
an .iso1.I from Ns% York %s p 'npa.'s =
Juno l. Asking me 10 write . denial Of
what he phrased AN .oft-repeated caJum-
ny. re said he had no recollection OF
any such conversation I wrote lengthy
lettee II explanation, giving my recotlec-
ton - the conversation ~ nearly a. pos
ssbie
Admiral ochiey wrote me. saying.
There In much In your letter which I
should not like TO use. ~ II would pro-
woke an assault upon you. which ! would
not like to happen. What want to show is
that the dialogue did not occur"
than wrote denial OF the colioquy
certainly not intending that no such coll
loouy occurred. but that II did not occur
- printed. Al the same time seat with
the admiral that the letter Of dental was
= denial Of the dialogue AZ II appeared in
print and that had told the correspond
ent a. the pAcsr that the substance OF the
conversation was correct In writing the
letter wished 70 refute the fact of any
controversy existing at . critical stage
% tho battle. II Che letter. was n denia,
OF the words ~ they stood In the published
article. a denial Of their literal correct
ness. and not denial OF the substantial
correctness at the statement
a copy 81 the letter has not been re-
tanned by him: he had rough draft
which has been miskatd Lieut. Command.
er Hodsnen appends his signature an a
voucher for the accuracy with which the
foregoing II given Very respectfully,
IF, A. CHADWICK.
Captain u. = n.
"A q. HODGSOS
LIEUTENANT Commander. U SN
ITO the Secretary ~ shs NAVY