The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-06-14
The sampson bounty.

1t would be dlSreSpeCtiui- We s"ff
criticise the Court of Claims for It's ama%-
ing decision in favor Of the contention u
Samson and other absentees from the sea
hattie of Santiago. that they were preSeh'
ard are entitled to the lions snare u 'he
prize money The court, OF course reaen
its conclusions upon the basis OF the tes-
t;monv presented by Sampson and his a So
o;.,.s which the Administration. instead |
of contesting in the interests of justice ue
cency. and the good of the service az
copied as the truth.
Ru, II is iucomprehensible that the court
could have decided as it did, II the 'ea'
facts in the case had been laid before n'
The reason probably Is that it had no QUE
outside of Sampson ard the navy ring ~
depend upon for correct lntof '"e
leading officers who might have eHpossu
the insfncerity and inaccuracy oil the sahp-
sonian position having been conveniehl-'
n,cted eff to the other side Of the world ny
the Navigation Bureau. The cniei inlefSs'
in the decision is in the dicta Oh tne eoui -
which declare that Sampson was a rear au-
mirat and commander-in-ehief OF the neet
At the time of the battle. and that he and
his flagship participated in the OBSTRUCTION
of Cervera's squadron. 1t foiio"s' :"
course. that Sampson Is accorded tEe
largest lump of the bounty. amounting IN
his case to 1885. while Schley, who con-
Quoted the operations. won the victory. ana
| SINK the Spanish vessels. is to aave only
| So. 900.
We learn that Ii is conceded in the navy
| ring circle that the decision IS largely
| based on technical grounds. which probably
means that any grounds are good enough
| that will serve to promote the fortunes OF
an unworthy favorite and to rob gallant
gentleman of the distinction and reno"h
he has honestly earned. We are not partic-
ularly familiar with naval technicaifties Oh
the kind in use in Crowninshield's office.
Consequently We may be excused for faiiins
to understand how the absent Sampson
who. with the New York. was hull Gown 10
the east when Cervera struck his coiofs'
could be said to be present at the hght anu
surrender, on any process cf reasoning
which did not involve plain and una III
terated lying.
somneoc was not there, and If the con-
,r.,v had been true he would not nave
been legally in command. The clear let
ter of the law was violated in giving him
"g,,nboat commission" to command over
officers superior to him in rank He couio
not be held competent to take advantage
NJ a nosition to which the statute distinct
" shows thu. neither the Secretary Oh inc
Navy nor the President could legally ap'
point him. Before. during, and AFTER th'
; s,n.iaco affair. Sampson was captain
ueurning under color Of pretended author
itv. the rank and command Of a rear al
miral.
The foregoing are facts fully within tn
knowledge of the Navy Department and o
the Administration generally. 1t is an out
rage upon the service and the country ina
thew were not submitted to the Court G
Claims. Sampson is no more entitled TO
cent of the Santiago bounty money tnan
the man who sells navel oranges to the DE
nartment clerks. But he will take all D
ran get. His capacity for absorption wa
sigually exemplified while he was IN com
~ mand at Annapolis. There. 1t Is charged
he appropriated to personal uses part
the nay of enlisted men whom he assigne
{ to duty as domestic, servants. They sue
u him for the amounts held up and receive
; Judgment. Technically" we presume
SAMPSON was entirely innocent in the maj
ter sea officer. he could not be consid
cred as being on shore. Hence he was nc
J.. at Annapolis, but technically" away o
the raging main somewhere shootin
:. mules.