Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1901-12-21

latter vessel, is too c1erly shown to ad-
mt of doubt; and the finding of the
court upon this point is fully sustained
by the evidence.
Under the tenth clause of the pre-
lcept-1t was established by the intro
Iduction before the court of the original
letter themselves that Rear Admiral
ESchley obtained from Lieutenant Com
mander Hodgson a junior officer VINO
had served under him, categorical
statement that Il certain 'colioquy re-
/ ported In the public press to have taken
place on the bridge of the Brooklyn
July 3 between himself and Commodore
Schley, never occurred altho Mr..
| Hodgson had assuerd the admiral that
the reports as published We're sub
stantially correct That the adj
miral gave out for publication
the categorical denial thus OBJ
tanned, but did not publish an ac-
companying explanatory and qualify
ing letter; and that subsequently, all
tho repeatedly appealed to by Mr..
Hodgson. Admiral Schley failed to do
justice in the matter
ut happened in the present inquiry
that the applicant while on the stand
A
i ~ or indirectly, the testimony given by
a majority of the witnesses. In most
i cases these witnesses swore affirmative
~ to incidents of which Commodore
\ Schley had no recollection. Where the
| matters thus in dispute were of impor-
4 tance-and they generally were-it was
rot only the right, but the duty, of the
/ court to accept the one and reject the
other. and to report in harmony with
such decision. Every court must do
i this when occasion arises and such ac-
/ ton constitutes no ground for remand
ing the case for reconsideration.
Paragraph rs of the paper under con-
| s!deration reads:
THE majority of the court have re-
Gently failed to determine as to who was
lin command of the Amercina naval
| forces engaged in the battle Of Santiago,
| the finding OF which fact was absolutely
necessary in order to determine properly
| the first specification Of the precpt as
| to the conduct of Commodore Schley in
connection with the events of the San
st.ago campaign
If it is true that a finding by the
court upon this question was absolutely
necessary in order to determine proper
~ the first specification of the precept.
/ then 1t must be stated that counsel for
the applicant failed Of their duty during
| the inquiry; several times in the course
Of the proceedings they brought this
question into court and took 1t again,
| without giving the court an opportunity
| to rule upon it; once withdrawing 1t so
hastily as to interrupt the president OF
| the court in sentence that promised to
be an adverse ruling. If they seriously
believed, as they now state to be the
case, that the matter Of the command on
| July was essential to the applicants
| interest, 1t was their plain duty not on
/ ~ to bring the question before the court.
| but to insist upon hearing there, and
others interested should have been
heard. To request that the court now
rule upon it is to ask that another Off
GERS interests be passed upon, to his
possible prejudice, in his absence and
1 without hearing-a thing intolerable,
whomsoever may be concernd.
| I'm conclusion, we are satisfied that
| no good purpose would be served by re-
hitting the proceedings or any OF the
features of this inquiry to the court. A
more patient, exhaustive and painstak-
| ing hearing was never given; greater
| consideration was never extended to any
| officer before military court OF in
curry. No expense was spared. no con-
venience or facility denied, no courtesy
refused. The applicant has had his day
in court, and the Judgment is against
him. 1t is accordingly recommended
that the proceedings be not returned,
but that the matter be concluded by the
/ departments approval OF the unanimous
| finding.
1--WE have the honor to be
| SAMUEL C. LEMLY,
Judge Advocate Court of Inquiry.
''E. p. HANNA,
| Assistant to Judge Advocate.
| ITO the secretary of the navy
The report, as appears from it's text, Is
solely that of Judge Advocate General
Lemly and Solicitor Hanna, and as such
| 4. was laid before Secretary Long. The
| secretary said yesterday afternoon that
he would not act upon the report that
day. He added that he would also with
hold action on the other matters pend
| ing connected with this issue, namely
Admiral SIMPSONS appeal and Admiral
Schley's request to be allowed to be
heard by arguments on this appeal, ana
| the findings of the court of inquiry 1T
| self. There was an intimation. how
ever. that all of these matters would re-
ceive attention today and would be
finally disposed of as far as the depart
ment is concerned.
Early in the day Admiral Schley be-
came aware of the fact that the protest
of Stayton and Campbell on behalf of
Admiral Sampson had reached Secreta-
ry, Long, and he made request of the
secretary 10 be furnished with an off,
cial copy OF the protest, but was in
formed that as the protests of both the
admirals at that time were being con-
sidered by the judge advocate general,
the secretary could take no immediate
action on the request. Secretary Long
vent over TO the white house some time
before the cabinet melting, and. 1t is I'M
derstood, took with him the two docu-
ments.
In the event that Secretary Long app
proves the recommendation Of Captain
Lemly and Mr.. Hanna, it is stated upon
reliable authority that the suggestion
will be made to the president by Adj
miral Schley's counsel that he appoint
board Of three eminent lawyers, one
to be selected by himself and one each
TO be selected by Admiral Schley and
Admiral Sampson: this board to weigh
the evidence and report to the president.
1t is said there are number OF prece-
dents for such action.
NL.-s..ia:.,. C<o,,,ooh aud L ivAr