The Worcester spy. [volume] (Worcester, Mass.) 1898-1904, 1899-03-07
IN REPLY.
Long Answers That
Letter Of Schley's
QUOTATIONS MADE.
What Capt. Sigsbee Has to
Say.

Washington, March 6-Ihe Senate
committee on naval affairs TO-DAY made
public Secretary Longs second letter
in the Sampson Schley controversy,
this communication being in reply to
Admiral Schley's letters.
The first matter which the secretary
takes up is Admiral Schley's mention
20, which, the secretary says, seems to
have given certain senators the inn
preston that the department has with
held that letter. On this point, he
says:
'F'irst-That this letter was not in the
possession of the department on Feb.
8, nor was it's existence known to the
department at that time.
'Second-That it was in the possess
sion of Admiral Schley until the 9th of
February, when 1t was sent to the de-
department upon it's request to be fur
nished with all official records relating
to his duty as commander-in-ohief of
the flying squadron, and as a flag Off
Ger In the North Atlantic fleet
''Thrd-That in its instructions with
regard to maintaining the blockade of
Cienfuegos, it was not more explicit
than the letter of Admiral Sampson of
May 10, which accompanied the com
munication of the department of Feb
6. and which is published in the APP
pendix TO the report of the bureau Of
navigation, on page 464
Fourth-That on May q, the day af-
ter it was written, Admiral Sampson
sent orders to Commodore Schley in
duplicate, by the Hawk and Marble
head, which orders We're received by
Commodore Schley during the early
forenoon OF the 23d and oath respect
lively. directing Commodore Schley to
proceed with all dispatch, but cautious
ly, to Santiago, if satisfied that the
Spanish squadron was not at Cienfue-
gos. The set of these orders sent by
the Hawk was received on the same
day as the letter of the 10th, and bear-
ing the latter date, May 21st, of course
revoked the instructions to blockade
Cienfuegos, contained in the letters OF
the 18th and goth.
"Fifth--That in obedience to these in
structions, the flying squadron left CT
enfuegos on the afternoon Of the oath
but did not reach the immediate vicin-
ity of the port of Santiago until the
morning Of the 10Th of May"
The secretary quotes the admirars
reference to the departments order re-
oeived by him on the 9th day of May
directing him to positively ascertain
If Cervera's fleet was in Santiago har-
Dor, and not to allow him to leave San
tiago If found certainly to be there,
without a decisive action" gives the
! admihars reply in full and says:
1T will be seen that Rear Admiral
Schley's statement to the Senate does
not show that he started to return TO
Key West, and signaNed to the SQUAD
ron to that effect, and so informed the
department, and it might be inferred
that he Immediately obeyed that order
and ascertained the presence of the en-
envy at Santiago. On the contrary. his
telegram above, dated May %. and writ
ten May q, shows that, though having
Just received the telegram of the de-
partment and having on hand a sufIi-
cient supply of coal to return to Kew
West, he reported that he could not
obey the order. and continued to pro-
coed towards Key West. However. II
later became evident to him that this
was unnecessary and he resumed the
movement toward Santiago"
Another point in Admiral SchIeys let
ter is touched upon in the following
manner: Admiral Schley's mention of
the signal by Admiral Sampson, at
AS a. m.,July 3-'disregard movements
of the commander in chief'-and his
mention Of the movement of the COM
mander in chief toward Siboney. is
followed by an incorrect inference. to
wit: This left me senior officer pres
emit and necessarily clothed me with
the responsibilities of command"
Annexed to the letter from the score
tary is one from Capt. Sigsbee in re-
ply to Admiral Schley's reference to
himself as commander Of the scout
steamer st. Paul. quoting him as au-
thority for the opinion that Cervera's
feet was not in Santiago harbor. On
this point Sigsbee says:
What I actually said to the admiral
was that Pilot Nunez had first ex-
pressed a belief that such large vessels
as Cerveras cruisers could not get in
to Santiago because of their length, but
he afterwards admitted that they
might get in with the aid of tugs.
Every officer on board the st. Paul
knew that 7 believed Cervera to be at
Santiago; nevertheless considered
Nunez's opinion"
He says that he first saw the fleet in
the harbor May 30, and signaled Adj
miral Schley. and adds: while 7 had
not known from previous observation
that Cerveras fleet was in Santiago.
believed that II was there because /
had been so Informed by the navy de-
partment. and during the eight DAYS
the ST. Paul remained off Santiago. the
different vessels touching there and
communicating with me had brought
no counter report from the navy de-
partment"