The Worcester spy. [volume] (Worcester, Mass.) 1898-1904, 1899-11-12

Senate called for reports on Admiral
Schleys case. These weI}a compiled
from official reports and furnished as
requested. In order that 40 errors or
omissions might occur, the department
appointed three officers for the purpose
of compiling these. and associated with
item Admiral Schleys own fiag officer
to attest the accuracy of the reports.
Second, When the news paper 1contr0-
versy arose, in which the department
had no share, as to a conversation
which was said to have taken place
during the battle of Santiago between
Commander ScEley and his navigating
officer, Lieut. Hodgson. One n5~spa-
per published this conversation several
times, stating that Lieut.. Hodgson had
dlvulged it.
Subsequently another paper pub
lished letter from Lieut.. Hodgson to
Admiral Schley, declaring that such a
converse ton had not taken place, when
the first paper, ostensibly on the testi-
mony of another officer stated that
Lieut.. Hodgson had, nevertheless, de-
clared that such a conversation had
taken place.
Under the circumstances, 1t looked
as if one of the two officers had pub
ter concerning the navy As this, I'M
to the service and involve it in q scan
dial, it became necessary, as customary
in such cases, to call for an explana-
ton.
Both officers were, therefore, asked
by the department to furnish such ex-
PLANTATION. The result was that Lieut..
HOdgson declared that his denial of the
conversation was to be construed that
the conversation had not taken place
in the terms reported but that the sub
stance of the same had been correctly
stated
1t was further established that the
lieutenant, outside Of his communica-
ton to Admiral SShley in which he
denied the conversation published, had
sent another letter in which he de-
clared that the conversation with the
former had been misrepresented by the
newspapers only as to its terms, but
not as to it's substance. Lieut.. Hodgson
had previously sent another letter of
similar purport to Admiral Schley.
1t is evident that the course of action
of the department in this matter is the
usual course resorted to by the depart
ment in order to give an officer an OPP
portunity to explain that which, IL not
explained, would lay him open to the
charge of improper talk or conduct.
department did not call upon Admiral
Schley to explain why he had published
the letter which must have given the
impression that such a conversation
had never taken place, and not the &C
companying letter and the former let
ter, both of which showed that the con-
versation had taken place, If not in the
terms stated, yet in substances and why
he did not explain the circumstances
hot 1a44 - at, .,I
the real facts, were held back, while
the other letter, which was calculated
to give different impression, was pub
lished. The consideration which the de-
partment showed in not calling upon
the admiral for an explanation of these
matters can certainly not be regarded
as persecution. gtf a..
The foregoing is all the department
has done in this matter, except that 1t
mas assigned to Admiral Schleg such
work as would properly fall to an Off
Ger of his or superior rank in any or
binary sea service. He has also been
given every opportunity to appear be-
fore the public. No doubt, the battle
Of Santiago has been much discussed
outside of the department. but the de-
partment itself has so far never ex-
pressed an opinion as to the maneu-
Vers Of our ships in that battle.
NolHlIg, therefore, can be 1artner
from the truth than the statement that
Schley has been prosecuted. Whatever
mas been done was done with yo@ con-
sent, and to allay rathersthan5 to fur
ther stir up the excitement which is
always manifested in public discus
sion of personal merits. a &
Admiral Schley has no ground for
complaint, nor has he ever made
complaint. Should he do 50. the de-
partment is readysto make any invest-
CATION that he may desire or submit
lts report or claims to any competent
&
II Is not conceivable that any naval {
oIhcer- possessing a sense Of honor
should for moment suffer criticism,
10 say nothing of persecution9 on the
part of any authority over him, with
out Immediately calling for am investi-
CATION. Admiral Schley has had many
years experience in the naval profess
SION. and has met with every consider
atlon from this department.
therefore the fact that heehas ac-
cepted our course of action without
any demur is a. clear proof that he Is
ehtlrely satisfied with it, Or at least,
mat he deems it just and consjderate
ana has no cause for complaint. It
may be that the navy department has
maze some mistake in this matter but
lhere can certainly be no question OF
any persecution. Very respectfully
John d. Long.