New-York tribune., 1901-10-05
THE H0DGSON LETTERS.
HIS CORRESPONDENCE WITH
SCHLEY MADE PUBLIC.
IT WILL PROBABLY BE SUBMITTED TO
THE COURT OF INQUIRY TO-DAY.


THE COURT OF INQUIRY TO-DAY
Washington. Oct. +-Copies OF correspondence
between Leuterant Commander A. C. Hodgson
and Rear Admiral schey. between June g. 1899. and
August Is. 1901. were given to the to-day with
the statement that the correspondence will be
submitted to the Schley Court Of Inquiry by Hodg-
son while on the witness stand to-morrow. Most
of 1t already has been published In the newspapers.
although part Of It has not been made public
heretofore. On June s. 1899. Schley wrote to Hodg
son. inclosing editorial from THE New-York
Sum- alleging that colloquy had occurred be-
tween Schley and Hodgson the bridge Of the
Brooklyn in the battle of Santiago, in the course
of which the Admiral reported to have said:
Damn the Texas! Let her look out for herself
in reply to Hodgson's remonstrance against turn
ing the ship to starboard. Characterizing this as
a "grotesque lie" the Rear Admiral asked Hodg
son Ito write me your denial of this oft-repeated
calumny"
On June Hodgson responded in long letter,
dated at the New-York Navy Yard. denying that
he authorized the publication of any conversation
and making a long explanation OF what he says
occurred during the battle He added that what
printed las a part of conversation between
you and me is substantially correct. though not so
as to the manner in which it took place
Hodgson then tells of the rage with which the
Brooklyn heard the sinister whisper. upon
!, her to Guantanamo Bay. that they were
gun shy and he says that he gave what he
thought true explanation of the Brooklyns s
turn to many officers of the fleet of whom
failed to agree with him. He explains that he
thought Rear Admiral Schley regarded this turn as
a strategicaI maneuvre. looking to the further
part the Brooklyn was to play in that days battle
rather than as an effort to avoid interfering with
the fire of the vessels of the fleet. In fact.
thought then | think that the turn to star
board caused more interference"
Then Hodgson gives his explanation OF the turn.
He tells belief that existed that the Spanish
ships outclassed the Americans in speed, and that
In the absence of the New-York. the Brooklyn was
the only American ship capable of preventing the
escape of the Spaniards should they pass the fire
of the batteships The Spanish torpedo boats also
to be reckoned with.
PRAISES sCHLEY's JUDGMENT.
Therefore" says Hodgson. after putting the
helm to starboard and to port once or twice to
counterac the efforts OF the Theresa and the Viz
caya to get into closer action and ram us, and
after the leading Spanish ship had reached just
little abaft port beam, you decided to port the
helm and turn around in chase to prevent the es-
cape of any of the Spanish vessels.
Hodgson writes that he suggested that the Texas
OFF their starboard beam. and that there was
danger of running her and getting right across
her line Of fire. and that Schley replied that the
Texas would have to look out for that that 1T was
imperative get around Immediately, and that, by
turning port you would get so close to the
enemy that you would expose yourself to attack
from the torpedo boats that lucky shot or two
by the enemy might disable the Brooklyn and that
YOU did not propose to run such a risk that
stage Of the battle when it was unnecessary and
so much depended on the speed of the Brooklyn
Hodgson writes that he then suggested backing
the sarboard engine. because ii would shorten the
circle and give the Texas a wider BERTH and that
Schley replied after pause NO because IL would
deaden speed of turning and you wish to get
around quickly possible For weeks after
the battle Captain Cook under the impression
| that had backed the starboard engine"
Hodgson explains that in making the suggestion
he was dscharging his duty the navigator of the
ship. charged with her safety and at the moment
did consider the effect of the upon re-
suits OF the battle. and he adds, II Immediately
perceived that your cool Judgment at this trying
moment had enabled you TO consider the results of
your decision. and then now, 1t seemed 10 me
that you had decided wisely: that II a
| stratesical move of the greatest Importance and
that the result of the battle most fully proved its
wisdom"
Hodgson goes on 10 declare that he under
the impression up to the time he THE New
York Sun publication including the colloquy. that
Schley made the to starboard because the con-
ditions he UIodgson) had stated. Continu-
ing, he assures the rear admiral that he never
would have given the explanation he did OF the
loop had he for a moment suspected that the rear
admiral had given any other reasons.
sCHLEY FELT FOR HODGSON.
Under date of Washington June TO- 1899 Schley
disclaming any sense of annoyance from the news
pa per attack says But do feel for yourself that
a colloauy should be made up by them that did
not occur between you and me, and II Is this that
/ desire protect you against. OF course. you did
authorize this. and it is this dialogue which
should be denied. l have no recollection Whatever
of anything of the kind. and my memory is ex-
ceedngly clear OF the events OF that day. Tor
never felt in all my life less excitement or more
steadiness of Judgment than when the Dons came
out that day. When the turn was made the Brook
lyn was in my judgment, within the distance OF
their tactical diameter and If it had been made 10
port we should probably have passed inside their
line but having them exposed TO the uninterrupted
fire of all the ships important i'm the earlier mo-
ments of the fight, the proper strategy OF Dat'e
was to avoid Interfering with that and the sequei
shows that made no mistake.
Cook really gave the order. which L approved
and II IS possible that your conversation was with
him but The Suns effort has been to promote
the notion that you and had controversy at 'ne
critical moment and this Is unjust TO you ana 10
me What desire is simply your denial that any
such colloquy occurred. and will see that proper
corraction is made to cover you from this slander
There is much in your letter that shouio hoe
like to use as II would provoke assault upon you,
Which I am unwilling to have happen. but what
want to show is simply that this dialogue did not
occur and that shown. the whole flmsy canard
falls TO the ground. Make your letter short as
possible
HODGSON'S SHORT DENIAL
Two letters came June II. from the New-York
Navv Yard in answer this letter. In one. very
short uodpson saws: THE coIloquy published in
The New-York Sun and alleged to have taken
place between you and me on the day OF the Dattie
off Santiago July 3. 1898, never occurred
The second letter is explanatory. Hodgson re-
meats that he told THE SUM- reporter that the first
publication in The Sun was garbed and that
when the turn to be made. had suggested
the proximity of the Texas and the prooaoie uaii-
ger of getting mixed UP with her If We turned to
starboard and that you said the Texas would have
to look out for herself" Schley returns thanks
for the denial furnished, adding touching the col
loauy Your statement that II never occurred Is
ahc