The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1899-06-20
WHAT SCHLEY SAID TO COOK.
HoDGs0N GIVES HIS VERSION OF
THE CONVERSATION.

His Reply to Hodgson's Suggestion
Was "AII Right" and Not "D-
the TeXas"-Neither Did He Say
1--WE Are Near Enough to the
Spaniards AIready"-Investign
Shows Published Statement Dis
tOrted the Facts.
Washington. June 19.-The occurrences
on the bridge of the Brooklyn during the
battle OF July 8, having been the subject
OF controversy IN the newspapers, the
navy department recently undertook an
investigation of the various allegations
Lieut. Commander Hodgson and Lieut.
Commander Heilner. who have figured in
the controversy, were both called on for
explanations of the utterances attributed
to them, and the former was directed to
report for examination on this point to
Capt. Chadwick. at Boston
The department has now given out for
publication Capt. Chadwick's report of the
matter. Il is not yet determined whether
or not the answer of Lieut.. Commander
Heilner will be made public at this time,
Capt. Chadwick's report is as follows:
u. S. S. New York, Boston, Mass, June
u
"Sir-In obedience to your order of the
l2th inst, have TO report the following as
the statement by Lieut. Commander Hodg-
son Of the conversation between Rear Ad-
miral schley and himself during the ac-
ton of July 3, 1898. He states as follows:
What SchIey Did Say.
''As we were approaching the Spanish
ships, heard Admiral Sehley say port or
starboard several times to Capt. Cook in
the coming tower, the admiral being on
the patform surrounding the coming
tower. 1 had been on the bridge above and
was just coming down to report the posi-
ton of the ships when l heard the ad-
miral say, Hard aport.' The Maria Te-
resa was then hauling abaft our port beam.
The Brooklyn was heading about north
east.
II told the admiral, or at least sug-
gested to him, that the Texas was very
close TO our starboard hand. and that
turning to starboard would bring us too
close to her l don't know that l used
the word collision. l did not say You
mean starboard.' I intended him to un-
derstand there was danger of running into
The Texas. He said: All right or words
to that effect. 1 cannot repeat verbatim.
when l knew he was going to turn to
starboard, l suggested backing the star
board engine in order TO make a smaller
circle and give the Texas a wider berth,
but he decided against that as easing
the speed of the turn. He did not say,
that | know of, We are near enough to
them (he Span!ard9 already The only
thing l gathered from what he said was
that if we turned to port, we Should get so
close that we should expose ourselves to
torpedo attack l supposed he meant tor
pedo boats! and replied to him that l mad
not seen them.
Lieutenant Commander Hodgson states
that he did not intend to convey m his
note of denial, sent at the request Of Ad-
miral Schley and published in the Wash
ington Post, the idea that no such colo
guy took place.
Tenor of HOdgson's Denial.
HE states regarding this, as follows:
Admiral Schley wrote me, enclosing
an editorial from a New York paper (of
June y, asking me to write denial OF
what he phrased an oft-repeated calum-
ny He said he had no recollection or
any such conversat ton. l wrote a lengthy
lection of the conversation as nearly as
possible. Admiral Schey wrote me say
ing, There is much in your letter which
! should not like TO use, as 1t would pro-
not like 10 happen. What l want to show
is that the dialogue did not occur
Il then wrote q denial of the colloquy,
certainly not intending to say that no such
colloquy occurred, but that it did not oc-
cur as printed. l, at the same time, sent
with this q second explanatory letter, ex-
plaining 10 Admllal Scniey lhat tne letter
of denial was a denial of the dialogue as
it appeared in print, and that l had tod
the cores spondent of the paper that the
substance of the converse ton was correct
In writing the letter, l wished 20 refute
the fact of any controversy existing at a
critical stage OF the battle. It, the letter
was a denial of the words as they stood
in the published articles, denial Of their
literal correctness and not denial of the
substantial correctness of the statement
"A copy OF the letter has not been re-
tained by him. he had a rough draft which
had been mislaid.
Lieutenant Commander Hodgson ap-
pends his signature as a voucher for the
accuracy with which the foregoing is
given. Very respectfully,
IF E. Chadwick,
Captain, United States Navy"
"a. G. Eodgson, Lieutenant Commander
United States Navy.