The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1899-01-24
BERRY QUESTION:
Say, Was 1t Sampson, or Was
1t Schley"?
Is in Fair Way to be Answered
Officially.
SENATE SQUABBLES
Over the Rival Claims Of the
SENATE
Over the Rival Claims Of the
Two officers,
And Decides to Send For the
Papers in the Case.

Washington, Jan. 24.-The entire ex-
ecutive session of the senate yesterday
was devoted wholly to the discussion of
the promotion of Admirals Sampson and
Schley and other naval officers engaged
in the Santiago campaign over the
heads OF officers who were their super
iors in rank. The controversy was then
postponed for twenty days after a vote
had been taken to call for the records
of the navy department bearing upon
the conduct of all affected by the ad-
Vancement.
The discussion arose over the resolu-
ton of which Senator Butler was the
author, calling for these documents. AS
originally offered it asked for the rea-
sons for the advancement, but the reso-
luton was modified so as to request
the records only. The first vote was on
a motion made by Senator Hale to lay
the resolution on the table, and on this
the ayes and noes were taken, result
ing: Ayes 81, noes So. The resolution
was then allowed to pass without fur
Their division.
For three hours previous to this, how
ever, the senate had been engaged in
very animated verbal battle which in
VOlVed many intr1cacieS and was par
ticipated in by a large number of sem
atOrS. The main contest was first over
the general policy of promoting these
officers over others who were charac-
terized as quite as deserving, though
less fortunate in that they were de-
prived of such active participation in
the war, and second, as to the relative
merits of Sampson and Schley.
Senators German and Wellington of
Maryland, one a Republican and the
other a Democrat, united in a fierce
attack upon the navy department for
Senators Lindsay, Pettigrew, Perkins
and Money attacked the whole system
of promotion as "a species of favoritism
which was not warranted by the facts"
"a ,s.-f,
defended by Messrs. Hale, Chandler and
Lodge. Senator Wellington was
pecially Jealous in his advocacy of the
claims of Admiral Schley, and in his
presentation of reasons why Admiral
Sampson should not be preferred over
him both he and his Democratic col
league, Mr.. German, made the state
ment that If the official papers were or
dered they would demonstrate beyond
possible question the fact that Schley
and not Sampson fought the battle of
Santiago. They contended that with
Sampson ten miles away he could not
be accredited constructively with hav-
ing command of the fleet on the men,
orable day when the Spanish vessels
were sent to the bottom. On the con-
trary, they held that Schley was on the
ground; he was the senior officer, and
that he was engaged actively and most
effectively in the conflict all the world
knew, regardless Of the favors of the
government at Washington. Senator
Lindsay found much in the promotion
of both Schley and Sampson over Com
mOdOre Watson to condemn.
He took occasion to praise Watson as
a man who undoubtedly would have
made a fine record in the war if given
the opportunity he should have had as
senior officer and said that to deprive
were pressed to the front and given the
posts of honor. 1t was in every way
unfair ana unworthy of a great country.
Senator Perkins, Senator Platt Comm
a at or oil leo af~ifi
the system as one liable to result in I'M
fairness unless very cautiously entered
upon, agreeing that at any rate the SEN
ate should have the record that it might
decide for itself as to the merits of the
men so signally favored compared with
those who had received none of the
loaVeS and fishes.
Senators Hale and Chandler both
members of the naval committee, de-
Tended the action of the navy depart
ment in giving preference to the men
who took upon themselves the brunt of
the battle in Atlantic waters and in
preferring the man who was in COM
mand of the fleet. They deprecated
the opening up of a controversy which
Senator Chandler said might lead to a
condition which might prove as I'M
savory as that which the war investi-
eating commission had developed in
connection with the army beef contracts
Senator Lodge in deploring this policy
said owing to the fact that he had but
recently, in the interest of private re-
search, made an exhaustive inVeStiga-
ton, he was enabled to throw much light
upon the controversy in behalf of the
contention that the controversy should
not be re-Stirred.
During the presentation of this side
much was said in upholding the claims
of Sampson in preference to those of
Schley, and the friends of the latter
officer were warned that if they insisted
upon pressing the investigation too
closely some facts would be developed
that would not be agreeable to them.
The charge was made that Schley had