The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1899-11-16
REAR ADMIRAL SOHLBY AND SEQ
RETARY LONG.

y
Long, Secretary of the Navy, in
which he defends himself and the
administration against the charge
that they prosecuted Rear Admiral
Schley. He asserts that Schley
disobeyed orders, and that he has
received much more consideration
than lie was entitled to.
Col. A. X. Mcclure, editor of
the Philadelphia Tines, staunch
friend of Schley's, sent a dispatch
from Washington to his paper on
Monday, in which he answers
Longs letter in vigorous language.
He says that the letter was first
published in Milwaukee German
paper just before the election for
the purpose of influencing the Ger
man vote in favor of the admins
tration, and that this is breach of
courtesy entirely unworthy Of the
head of the Navy Department, as
the letter was written apparently
for the consideration of the Presi-
dent in answering All inquiry of
Senator McComas and others who
urged more generous treatment of
Schley by the government. There
is nothing new in Secretary Long S
letter. Every assertion in it was
made in his letter to the Senate
when the nominations of Schley
and Sampson were pending before
that body, and when the President
was compelled to nominate Schley
as the senior over Sampson, it was
unanimously confirmed by the SEN
ate.
Col. Mcclure then proceeds as
follows
POLITICAL BLINDNESS IN WASH
INGTON.
There is no place in the land
where there seems to be such a per-
sistent epidemic of political blind
ness as there is among the bureau
cratic circles in Washington. Sec
retary Long seems to be forgetful
of the fact that if one-lalf Of his ac-
cusations against Schley are justi-
fed he is wholly without excuse for
not having dismissed him from his
command before the battle of San
tiago, and having been silent until
Schley won the great victory he
can now make no accusations
against Schley which have any force
beyond proving that the Secretary
failed in performing his duty and is
untitled for his place. Any intelli-
gent and dispassionate citizen read
ing Secretary Longs illumination
against Schley can reach but one
conclusion, and that is that Schley's S
chief offense is in having destroyed
the Spanish fleet in the absence of
the commander-in chief.
He criticises Schley's failure to
blockade Santiago and disobeying
orders by starting for Key West to
replenish his coal. He insists that
Schley should have done the i'm
possible thing by coaling his fleet
at sea in furious gale that lasted
during all the period that he was
struggling to comply with orders
which he was powerless at the time
to execute, but there is no COM
plant made of Sampson, who, with
a calm sea, sent the Massachusetts,
away to coal only a few hours be-
fore the battle was fought. When
it is remembered that the Massa-
chusetts was the twin battleship of
the glorious Oregon, and that after
having sent one of his two strong
est war vessels away to coal when
the sea was calm, he took his own
vessel, one of the only two credited
with sufficient speed to race with
the Spanish cruisers, out of the fight
when he could have fulfilled his
mission more speedily in a steam
launch. The public know these
facts, and Secretary Long is GER
tainly afflicted with the malady of
political blindness in its most ag-
gravated form when he haunts his
fiimsy, and apparently malicious as
saults upon Schley.
A WEAK AND PITIABLE INVENTION.
A weaker and really pitiable in
vention of Secretary Long to pref
udice Schley, is his statement of the
dispute as to the alleged assertion
of Schley when he turned the
Brooklyn aport to avoid blanketing
his own vessels and to prevent the
destruction of his own. Some day
the truth will be known and when
known Secretary Long will blush
when reminded of the use he has
made of it. He took cognizance OF
dispute between two subalterns as
to this alleged statement of Schley,
and Oh the weak pretense of vindi-
eating the character of the navy,