The evening times., 1900-06-13
Circulation Statement.
sampson and the Court OF Claims.

The country is well aware that soon after
the sea battle of Santiago in which the
squadron Of the Spanish Admiral Cervera
was destroyed by a division OF the Ameri-
can feet under Commodore Winfield Scott
Schley. Captain W. T. Sampson. who had
been irregularly placed in command Of the
fleet. but who was not present at the en-
gagement, filed his claim fer bounty. prize
money, and so on. The Court OF Claims
has Just handed down its decision in favor
of Sampson which. as il is a decree Of
high judicial tribunal. must be treated
with unQuestioning and cheerful respect
II the same court were TO find that Samp-
son was also the victor of Manila, We
should bow to the dictum with becoming
meekress; the more SO since he is as muCh
entitled 20 the credit of the one victory IS
to that of the other. In its decision the
court says:
Rear Admiral ". T. Sampson, United States
Navy was the oommander-in- chief of the said
United States naval forces feet. and Commo-
dore W. : Schl~v. United States Navy. was the
commanding officer Of a division. or squadron.
thereof on duty under the orders Of the said
cCmmander-in-cElef"
thousand dollars bounty money. and Schley.
who did all the fighting while the alleged
''commander-in-chief" was behind the hUr-
izon. is to have Only three thousand. We
notice. with chaSteEed interest, that some
Administration organs today are smirkirg
over what they are pleased to consider q
judicial ending 20 the Sampson-Schley con-
troyersy. They probably viii discover, en-
the contrary, that the matter has me-e,y
been reopened. The Court Of Claims nsc-
essarily based its conclusions upon TIE
representations placed before il, and il
would be the basest hattery to assume I, at
the Administration did not tske good care
that the showing should be favorable to
Sampson.
If the truth had been fully laid before the
court. We do not believe it would have
found that Sampson was rear admiral. '
or legally in command OF the feet at or
prior to the time of the battle He was
a captain designated to take rank and
command over the heads of his supsriors
in rank, in clear violation of the statute
The law allows the President to place a
junior in command over a senior in the
same grade. 1t does not permit him. di-
rectly or by any implication to give a
commander command over captains or a
lieutenant commander over commanders.
II # did, it would be legal for the Presi-
dent to place Admiral Dewey in command
OF one squadron. Rear Admiral SchIey in
command of another. and by 'gunboat
commission" give command over both TO
the youngest ensign in the Navy. As we
have said. it is improbable that the seri-
Gus question whether Sampson ever was
rightfully in command Of the feet in Cuban
waters, was allOaed 20 get e-ore the curt
1t is to be confessed that some aston
ishment VIII be felt throughout the coul.-
try at the further finding of the Court Of
Claims that Captain SIMPSONS flagship.
the New York. took part in the battle
Possibly, upon the theory that ships. like
theosophists, have astral bodies alart
from their material ones, the astral New
York may have been in the action, while
the other one was with Sampson twenty
miles away. However. the Court evidently
believes Sampson. Then why should hot
IL say SO? At the same time we are at
loss to understand how any process Of rea-
soning that would establish Simpsons s
participation in the fight would not equally
prove that his hacker, CrowninshieId, was
in 1t also.