The united opinion. [volume] (Bradford, Vt.) 1881-1970, 1899-06-23
WHAT SCHLEY SAID.
Episode of July 3 on the
Brooklyn Recalled.
CAPTAIN CHADWICK MAKES REPORT.
The Conversation, Says Hodgson
Took PIace-The Denial Was That
of the Words as Published.
Substance Was Correct.


Took PIace-The Denial Was That
of the Words as Published.
Substance Was Correct.
WASHINGTON, June 20-The oc
curences ON the bridge of the Brooklyn
during the battle of July having been
the subject of controversy in the news
papers, the navy department recently I'M
dertook an investigation of the various al
legations. Lieutenant Commander Hodg-
son and Lieutenant 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 eX-
animation on this point to Captain Chad
wick at Boston. The department has
now given out for publication Captain
Chadwicks report on the matter. 1t is
not yet determined whether or not the
answer of Lieutenant Commander He'll
ner will be made public at this time
Captain Chadwicks report is as follows:
U. S. S. New York,
Boston, Mass, June II, 1899.
Sir-ln obedience to your order of the
18th inst. have to report the following
as the statement by Lieutenant Com
mander Hodgson of the conversation be-
tween Rear Admiral Schley and himself
during the action of July B. 1898.
He states as follows:
''As we were approaching the Spanish
ships l heard Admiral Schley say port or
starboard several times to Captain Cook
in the coming tower the admiral being
on the platform surrounding the coming
tower. l had been on the bridge above
and was just coming down to report the
positions of the ships when I heard the
admiral say, Hard aport.' The Maria
Teresa was then hauling abaft our port
beam. The Brooklyn was heading about
northeast. | told the admiral, or at least
suggested to him, that the Texas was
very close on our starboard side and
that turning to starboard would bring us
too close to her. i don't know that
used the word collision I did not say,
you mean starboard' | intended him
to understand there was danger of run
ming into the Texas. He said, All right,
or words to that effect cannot repeat
verbatim. When l knew he was going
to turn to starboard, suggested backing
the starboard engine in order to make a
smaller circle and give the Texas a wider
berth, but he decided against that as de-
creasing the speed of the turn. He did
not say, that l know of, we are neal
enough to them (the Spaniards) 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. / supposed
he meant torpedo boats and replied to
him that had not seen them"
Lieutenant Commander HOdgsOn states
that he did not intend to convey in his
note of denial sent at the request of Adj
miral Schley and published in the Wash
ington Post the idea that no such COLO
guy took place.
He states regarding this as follows:
Admiral Schley wrote me, iRclosing an
from q New York paper of June
1G, asking me to write a denial of what
he phrased AN oft repeated calumny
He said he had no recollection of any
such conversation. l wrote a lengthy
letter of explanation, giving my recollec-
ton of the conversation as nearly as pos
sible. Admiral Schley wrote me, saying:
There is much in your letter which |
should not like to use, as it would pro-
woke assault upon you, which l would
not like to happen. What | want to
show is that the dialogue did not occur
then wrote denial of the colloquy, GER
tainly not intending to say that no such
cOIlOQuy DuJ Judl IL ulu not OCCUR
as printed. l at the same time sent with
this a second explanatory letter, explain
ing to Admiral Schey that the letter of
denial was a denial of the dialogue as it
appeared in print and that had told the
of the paper that the sub
stance of the conversation was correct.
In writing the letter | wished to refute
the fact of any controversy existing at a
critical stage of the battle 1.-THE letter
was denial of the words as they stood
in the published article-a denial of their
literal correctness and not a denial of the
correctness of the state
ment"
A copy of the letter has not been re-
tanned by him. He had rough draft
which has been mislaid.
Lieutenant Commander Hodgson APP
1ends his signature as a voucher for the
accuracy with which the foregoing is
given. Very respectfully,
h. E. CHADWICK,
Captain, L. S. n.