The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1901-08-22
TURNED DOWN
REQUEST OF ADMIRAL sCHLEY
REGARDING THE PURPORTED
HOWISON INTERVIEW
IS REFUSED BY HA0KETT
Says Court of Inquiry Itself Must
Pass Upon the Fitness for
the Case of It's own
Members
TEXT OF CORRESPONDENCE

WASHINGTON, Aug. M.-The navy de-
partment this afternoon gave out the
correspondence with Admiral SchIey rel
ative to opinions said to have been ex-
pressed by Admiral Howison, a member
of the court of inquiry. The closing let
ter of the acting secretary of the navy
states that it would be irregular for the
navy department to hear and determine
questions affecting the competency of
members of the court. and advises Ad-
miral Schley that the question of Ad-
miral Howisons competency be left to
the court Of inquiry itself. The corre-
spondence follows:
SCHLEY'S PROTEST.
Washington, D. c., Aug. 20, 19O1.-To
the Secretary of the Navy-Sir: l have
the honor to enclose herewith a neWspa-
per clipping IN which Real admiral
Henry L. Howison (who has been select
of Rear Admiral l.. A Kimberly from
the court of inquiry is represented to
nave expressed certain opinions.
If this statement taken from the Ros-
ton Record, be true, it would, in the
judgment OF my counsel disQualify him
for serving in this inquiry.
l respectfully request that a copy Of
this letter with this enclosure be stlh-
mitted to Rear Admiral Howison for his
consideration; and l would further re-
quest that l may be favored with a copy
of his answer.
1 have entertained a high personal re-
gard for Rear Admiral HOwison through
out long professional service. SO that
feel sure that if the statements expressed
IN the enclosure are true, Rear Admiral
Howison would not be willing to serve
as judge under such circumstances.
nave the honor to be, very respect
fully, W S. Schley!
Rear Admiral, u. S. N.
HACKETTS RESPONSE.
Washington, Aug. 21., 1901. w. S
Schley, Washington-Sir: Your letter Of
the ZUth, enclosing newspaper clipping in
regard to alleged statements Of Rear
Admiral Henry L. Howison was received
by mail this morning.
soon after it's receipt Capt James
Parker, one Of your counsel, called at the
department and stated he intended to go
10 Boston on Saturday to make a further
investigation in the premises and wished
that no step be taken by the department
until until the result Of his visit could be com
municated to the department.
The department would be pleased to
learn Immediately if it be your desire
that action be withheld for the present.
Respectfully #. w. Hackett
Acting Secretary.
SCHLEY REPLIES.
,o1, The Arlington, Washington, Aug. 81.
I"oi'T l7AA III reply 10 the department i
letter Of this date referring to clipping
containing alleged statements of Rear
Admiral Henry L. Howison. I will sav
tnat think the action requested
should not be withheld, as its purpose
was TO avoid any delay in the court after
its session had begun
Second-I beg therefore that the re-
quest OF my letter OF yesterday be com
lnuhlcAted to Admiral HoWiSOn Very
respectfully, w. s. Schley
Rear Admiral u. s. y.
10 the Secretary Of the Navy
REQUEST REFUSED.
Washington, Aug. q, 190-Sir: In re
ply to your letter of the 20th inst. en-
Closing newspaper clipping and request
ing the department to send it to Rear
ADMIRAL HowisOn together with a COPY
OF your letter, you are informed that the
appointment of Rear Admiral Howison as
a third member of the court of inquiry
was accomplished only after taking great
pains to insure absolute impartiality in
the officer selected. To a Question unOE-
ficlally put as to his availability in cHse
the department. should require his servi
ces, Rear Admiral Howison replied:
l know of no reason why I should not
be available for such duty should the de-
partment so decide. have made no pup
lie utterance relating to the subject. and
1 have seen none of the official reports
ana papers bearing on the Questions to
be decided by the court"
Your counsel Capt. Parker, before the
toned to the acting secretary the names
Of certain rear admirals, any of whom. he
said, would be perfectly satisfactory TO
Rear Admiral Schley.
One of the names so mentioned was
that of Rear Admiral Howison tt may
be added that of four officers consulted by
the department, the names of three were
upon the list thus mentioned by your
counsel.
This much has been detailed in order
to remind you of the fact that a fair
minded officer, of excellent reputation and
of unblemished character has been found
in the person of Rear Admiral Howison.
who, at the date of his appointment. ap-
pears to have enjoyed the confidence of
both the department and yourself.
Your request is based upon a neWspa-
per clipping, that purports to contain
statements in regard to the truth OF which
you yourself do not express an opinion.
You ask the department to lay before
Rear admiral HoWlson a statement. Who'll
" unsubstantiated, that appears to have
been made by some person unknown at
a time and place likewise unknown.
The department is unable to view YOUR
request in any other light than that of
preliminary challenge of the fitness of
Rear Admiral Howison to serve as a
member of the court. 1t will be treated
as is usual in cases of courts of inquiry
The established practice in the military
as we'll as in the naval service has fixed
the method in which the right of clal-
lerge before coUrtS-martial and courts Of
inquiry shall be exercised
The department, having constituted the
court, should not al this stage of the pro-
ceedtngs undertake TO hear and deter
mine questions that may arise respecting
the competency of it's members. Such a
proceeding would be irregular, all ques-
tions of this nature being left to the de-
termination of the court for its inforrna-
tion Respectfully, f W, Hackett.
Rear Admiral W. S. Schley, U. S. N,
City.