Daily inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1881-1901, 1900-04-26
CAPTAIN Chadwick Bitterly
ASSallS Rear Admiral.
WILL HAVE TO EXPLAIN
A Reopening of the Whole Sampson
Schley C0ntr0verSy-HOn0r Of the
NAVY is at Stake-FriendS Of Both
Interested.

New York, April GA special TO the
Herald from Washington says: Secre-
tary Long is reported to have called the
attention Of Capt. +. e. Chadwick, who
commanded the armored cruiser New
York during the battle off Santiago de
Cuba, to an interview redited to him
and published a few days ago, in which
he bitterly assailed Rear Admiral w. S.
Schley.
1t is known that the interview came
to the attention of the secretary, and
it is considered sufficiently serious to
warrant an explanation from Captain
Chadwick. should Captain Chadwick
stand for the interview, it is likely thai
the department will feel in duty bound
to make him s~ubstantiate his statements.
In this way it is possible that the whole
Sampson-Schley controversy may be re-
opened. @-'1
In the interview credited to him Cap
Tain Chadwick is alleged to have made
these statements:
EVERY one Of us feels the disgrace that
Schley has put upon us. 1t is not Samp-
son or Schley that we care about or are
anxious to vindicate. 1t is the honor of
the NAVY that has been assailed, it's
esprit duEsrurps has received a serious
blow, andan the opinion of officers it has
been Injurious to us abroad by a dis
gracefulexhibition of pettiness, OF which
Admiral Sehley has been guilty.
II have for him only contempt. I
would not shake his hand if he offered
it to me, and in this I believe I simply
re-echo the statements of almost the en-
tire navy. If Admiral Schley desires a
vindication let him ask for an investiga-
tion of his conduct. hose who fought on
the ships at the battle of Santiago and
the general public, I am sure, desire such
an investigation, n will be willing to
abide by the result, whatever it may
be-"
Those who are acquainted with Cap
tain Chadwick's sentiments would not be
surprised if he should avow that he was
quoted correctly; but they express the
opinion that he would explain to the de-
partment that he did not authorize the
interview.
In such a case it is difficult to forecast
The action of the department. Section
2S6 of the navy regulation prohibits crit
1cisms of officers by their colleagues.
Violation of this regulation is punish
able by noting the offense upon the rec
ords of the guilty officer. Captain Chad
wick has heretofore been very careful not
~ ldih LOT puDllcdllOn, anu II Is tnlS 1aCt
which makes his friends here believe he
did not authorize the interview.
Captain Chadwick has never been
friendly to Rear Admiral Schley and the
tatter's friends intend to bring him to
account. The fact that Rear Admiral
Schley is several thousand miles away
hould have prevented any officer from
criticizing him, they declare, and they
are glad that Secretary Long has shown
his fairness by taking measures to pre-.
vent public criticism of their hero.
Should Captain Chadwick admit that
he made the statements quoted, it il
likely they will press the department tt
order a >court-martial and call it's atten,
ton to the case of Chaplain Mcintyre
who was dismissed because of criticism
of Capt. r. D.. Evans, who commanded
the battleship Iowa in the Santiago en-
gagement.