The age-herald., 1899-03-07
BY THE SENATE COMMITTEE
Sampson'S Letter to SChley Vas Not
 Withheld. by the Department.
TESTIMONY OF CAPTAIN sIGsBEE
In Regard to Coaling Of Santiago Re- ferred to By the Secretary as in Contradiction to Admiral
 Schley's Statement.

Washington, March 6.-The senate com mittee on naval affairs today made public the second letter of Secretary Long in the sampson-Schley controversy. this com munication being in reply to Admiral schley's letter.
 The first matter which the secretary takes up is Schley's mention of Sampson's letter on May 20, which the secretary seems to have given certain senators the idea that the department has withheld that let- ter. On that point he says:
 First-That this matter was not in the possession of the department on February 6, nor was it's existence known to the de- partment at that time.
 seeond-That it was in the possession of Admiral Schley until the 9th of February, when 1t was sent to the department upon its request to be furnished with all official recofds relating to his duty as commander in-chief of the flying squadron, and as flag officer in the North Atlantic fleet.
 Blockade of Cienfuegos
 Third-That in its instructions with re- gard to main taining the blockade of Cien- fuegos, it was not more explicit than the 
 accompanied the communication of the department of February 6, and which IS published in the appendix to the report of the bureau of navigation on page 464
 Fourth-That on May 21. the day after it was written, Admiral Sampson sent orders to Commodore Schely in duplicate by the Hawk and Marblehead which orders were received by Commodore Schley during the early morning of the 23d and 24th respect lively, directing Commodore Schely to pro- ceed with all despatch, but cautiously to Santiaeo, if satisfied the Spanish squadron was not at Cienfuegos. The set of these orders sent by the Hawk was received on the same day as the letter of the goth and bearing the later date, May 2, of course, revoked the instructions to blockade Cien- fuegos, contained in the letters of the 18th and 20th.
 Arrival at Santiago
 Fifth-That in obedience to these instruc- tions the flying squadron left Cienfuegos on the afternoon of the 24th, but did not reach the immediate vicinity of the port of San tiago until the morning of the 29th Of May.
 The secretary quotes the admiraPs refer ence to the departments order by him on OH the 27th of May directing to positively ascertain if Cervera's fleet was in San tiago harbor and not to allow him to leave Santiago if found certain to be there, with out a decisive action," gives the admiral's reply in full and says:
 Ut will be seen that Rear Admiral Scnley's statement to the senate does not show that he started to return to Key West and signalled to the squadron to that ef- feet and so informed the department and it might be inferred that he immediately obeyed that order and ascertained the presence of the enemy at Santiago. On the contrary his telegram above, dated May 2S and written May 2, shows, though having just received the telegram of the depart ment and having on hand sufficient SUD- ply of coal to return to Key West he re- ported that he could not obey the order and continued to proceed towards Key West. However, 1t later became evident that this was unnecessary and he resumed the movement towards Santiago.
 Admiral schiey's Letter
 Another point in Admiral Schley's. letter Is touched upon in the following manner:
 Admiral Schley's mention of the signal by Admiral Sampson at 8:45 a. m., July 3d. disregard movements of the commander-in- chief'-and his mention of the movement of the commander-in-chief toward Siboney is followed by an incorrect inference to- wit: This left me senior present and nec- essarily clothed me with. the responsibilities of command.' The signal above mentioned is one which Is frequently made in squad droh and is never held as in any sense a relinquishment of command. It is made where. for any reason, the flagship leaves it's assigned position as was the case when the New York left her habitual blockading station the morning of July 8. At such times it is made to avoid confusion which would result if other vessels fixing their position by reference to te flagship were to move with her. Without further signal re- sponsibiIity of command would not be shift ed unti the senior officer had gone out of signal distance"
 The statement concludes with the fol- lowing:
 Only to Complete Record
 ''The department furnishes the foregoing statement only to complete the record in compliance with the request of the senate on January 23, desiring to do Admirals Sampson and Schley full justice for ser- vices rendered, 1t has of full consideration of the circumstances, recommended to the president their promotion to the grade of rear admiral, and begs to express the hope that his recommendations to the same eff feet may be confirmed by the senate.'
 Annexed to the letter from the secre- tary is one from Captain Sigsbee in reply , to Admiral Schley's reference to himself as commander of the scout steamer St. Paul, quoting him as authority for the opinion that Cervera's fleet was not in Santiago harbor. On this point Sigsbee says:
 What actually said to the admiral was that Pilot Nunes had first expressed be- lief that such large vessels as Ceryera' 8 cruisers could not get Into Santiago be- cause 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 ] believed Cervera to be at Santiago; nevertheless.