The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1901-10-31
SCHLEYS REPORII
WAS SENT BACK
Refused, as New York
Was Not Mentioned.
SECOND DONE ACCEPTED
Sampson Said it Was Generous and
Thanked Him.
CROSS-EXAMINATION CONCLUDED
The Admiral Finished His Testimony Before
tie Court Adjourned Yesterday-There
is One More Witness for Admirars
Side to Be Called, When Judge
Advocate Will Introduce
Rebuttal Testimony.
CROss-EXAmINATION CONCLUDED
(By .issociatet, F,ess

(By Associated Fress)
WASHINGTON, Oct SSO-The long ora
deal to which Admiral Schley has been
subjected since Monday morning ended
this afternoon when his cross-exan1ina-
tion was concluded and he was allowed to
leave the witness stand When the
Judge-Advocate finished the cross-axau,i-
ton. shortly after 3 o'aloek, the court
propounded to the Admiral II number OF
questions prepared by the members af
points of the campaign OF the Flying
Squadron, but mainly centered about tha
difficulties encountered III coallnS and
the reasons for the retrograde n,oee-
ment. Not one OF them related to the
battle OF Santiago.
The Judge-Advocata's cross-eSamina-
ton to-day covered the retrosrade move.
nent, the reconnaissance of May 31st. and
the alleged colloquy with Lieutenant
Ho0gsOn about the Texas.
One of the most interesting features OF
+ the day was the development of the fact
that the report of the battle written by
Admiral Schley, July 8. 1898. was not the
original report The original report never
has been published. and. In accordance
day declined to allow it to go into tho
record.
WOULD NOT RECEIVE REPORT.
Admiral Schley was allowed to explain.
however, that Admiral Sampson declined
| to receive the first report because it did
not mention the presence Of the Nv York.
( IT felt that the victory at that tiIne's
said Admiral Schley in explaining the
! matter. was big enough for all. and I
made this change out OF generosity and
because I knew if the New York had been
present she NSsid have done as good
| work as anybody else.' s4sss
Captain Thomas Borden, of the Marine
Corps. who was aboard the Brooklyn. will
be the last witness called for Admiral
Schley. After he testities tomorrow the
Judge-Advocate will put on the stand the
witnesses in rebuttal, of whom there are
understood to be about firIeen. and it Is
probable that Admiral Schley'. counsel
will call several witnesses in Sur-rebuttal.
Among Captain Lemly's first questions
was one asking Admirai Schley's opinion
of the circular blockade. The Admiral re-
piled that he thought a circular blockade.
where all the vessels charged to the CEN
ter, would produce confusion and fnevita-
bly, lead to q different arrangement. acc
cording as the enemy moved east or west.
1.-The outcome, said he. could only be
more or less confusion. such as did act
ually occur later
THE RECONNOISSANCE
y number of questions were asked re-
garding the reconnaissance of May 31st.
Captain Lemly inquired: .In your report
of June list to the Department. concerning
the reconnaissance, you did not mention
any purpose to sink or destroy the Colon
..t did not
But in your telegraphic report you did
say that Your purpose was to destroy the
Colon?
The Judge-Advocate asked the Admiral
TO tell exactly what his purpose was in
the reconnaissance of May :-1st and
what instructions he had given. Reply
ing. he said that the signals made in.
dieated the purpose The signal instruct-
ed the ships to use their heavy guns
against tue Colon. The New Orleans.
with her lighter battery. was directed
to fire at the shore batteries. The in
srction was to go into 1900 yards, and he
thought until several days afterwards
that the ships had gone into that dis
tance. II directed the ships to follow
the flag, to operate against the Colon
| and fire at the forts to develop hem. and
| / think the reconnaissance. so far as it
went, was eminently successful. The
| Batteries were developed and the fact
| was demonstrated that the enemy WAS in
| port. With a squadron of only five on
six ships, I believed that only the strong
/, est military necessity would have justi-
! fled me in riskng the loss of a. vessel
| that might have reduced our squadron TO
! Il numerical inferiority with the enemy
| II one or two OF our ships had been Grip
| pied. the enemy might have come OUT
| and engaged us with disastrous reslts.,' =
| Captain Lemly asked why :he mouth
| of Santiago harbor had not been enfiladed
| and all the ships used on May 31st.
| WOULD ENDANGEsR SHIP.
| Admiral Schley replied that he had not
! done so, simply because the batteries
! would have been safe while the ships
| used thus would have been placed in
! greater danger This" he added lis
| like many arrangements which we might
| make that we do not make. The question
| OF coalins was so important and had been
/ so strongly urged by the commander in
| chief, felt that we should lose no oppor-
| tunity of putting the ships in the highest
| condition of efficiency.
why did you not steam more slowly as
you passed the mouth of the harbor
| The witness replied. in O deliberate
manner: well. that is a technical error
that might have been remedied u some
one else had been in command. Possibly
the firing would have been more effective
had we gone, in closer, but If we had. and
| had steamed more slowly there would
have been no gain. rs the range would
! have been narrower- 1t was q case OF
tweedIe6ee On the one hand and Of tweed
Iednn on the other.
| Gartain Lemly. at this point. passed
/. thc battle OF July. He asked whit .aS
4 frst movement OF the BrookIyas
helm after the enemy's ships were sight
| ed coming out:
1--WE were heading west by nor.h. ). he.
.srhe first helm was TO rort?'
I, ..eaptain Cook gave the osGer for thu
turn s
fes.
portart did you not
.sI think it was the movement that 6s-s