Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1901-10-21
Sohley's Secretary Again on the
Stand,
DESCRIBES RECEIPT OF DISPATCHES
Dispute Regarding the Admission
of Testimony.
CORRECTIONS BY WITNESSES

| I
the navy yard this morning at IL o'clock.
The court had much the appearance Of a
social function. There were quite a num-
ber of carriages that were driven into the
yard and to the gunners workshop. where
the court has its quarters OF the attend
ance four-fifths were ladies. The court
was. as usual prompt in beginning the pro-
ceedings and not only the members OF the
| court, but counsel, were apparently in
brighter and fresher frame of mind then
| usual. After the witnesses Of former days
had been recalled for the purpose of cor
recting their testimony Lieut. b. w. Wells
| jr., secretary to Commodore Schley during
| the Cuban campaign. resumed the testi-
mony which he had begun Friday After
a few preliminaries he began his narration
| of the battle of July 3 and was then ques-
| toned at some length by Mr. Rayner be-
| fore he was turned over to Capt. Lemly
| and Mr.. Hanna for cross-examination.
| Other witnesses called for the day were
| Mr.. Edward Graham, the Associated Press
| correspondent, who was with Commodore
Schley on the Brooklyn from the beginning
| Of the campaign at Hampton Roads until
its close; Lieut.. Edward Simpson. who
served on the Brooklyn, and Mr. Dennis /.
| Cronan.
Correcting Previous Testimony.
The first business before the court today
was the correction of reports of testimony
| previously given. Capt. Cook command
| ing officer of the Brooklyn. appeared and
asked to make an additional statement.
| He had, he said, spoken from hearsay
when he said that the Oregon on the morn
| ing of July had shifted her boilers and
| gotten up steam on all Of them.
Il find,'' he said, that she did not shift
| the boilers that morning, but she had
steam on all her boilers at ali times while
| in the Santiago blockade"
He stated that what he had said when
on the stand previously was what he had
heard and from the speed Of the Oregon he
mad accepted it as true, without knowing
that steam had continuously been on all
boilers
Captain John L. Hannum when called to
correct his testimony was asked BY the
court how soon after he went aboard the
Merrimac it was that she was able 10 get
up speed Of from six TO seven knots. capt.
Hannum was the chief engineer OF the
Brooklyn and fleet engineer Of the flying
| squadron. He replied that he had not
stated il was from six TO seven knots. and
it was five knots she made. and that was
made directly after he first went aboard
the Merrimac. The damaged part of the
Merrimac's engine had been taken from her
on the forenoon of the 9th and returned
on board after having been repaired on the
afternoon of the 2Sth
Capt. Hannum then wanted to make a
statement and produced memorandum,
and the Judge advocate asked II he pro-
posed to read the paper he had. He replied
1t was a copy of a portion of the log OF
the Brooklyn. He salu he wanted to make
statement in regard to the water suppy
In the boilers of the Brooklyn on July I'd
His statement was personal one. he said
Admiral Dewey remarked that the witt
ness could correct his own testimony but
That the correction he wanted to make ap-
peared not TO relate to his own testimony
The court decided that the witness could
not make statement in correction of the
statement made by another witness.
Lieut.. Carter, assistant engineer of the
Brooklyn, in correcting his testimony said
he thought, on reconsidering his statement
made Friday. that there was some wafer
in the two boilers he had before said were
empty. He was not sure, but it was his i'm
preston that some water was in those
boilers. They Were making a great effort
at that time TO eVapOrate water.
The BrookIyn's Course.
Ensign w. p. Cronan, who was on the
Brooklyn, was asked while on the stand
Friday to measure the distance Travelled
by the Brooklyn from her blockadng sta
ton off the MORO to the point she reached
al the end of the battle of July 3. When
he appeared this morning he said that he
had complied with this request and he had
found the distance to be, from the begin
ming of the battle up to 1:15 pm, thirty
niEe miles. This was measuring in a
straight line from the two locations. He
said that he could not measure the dis
tance over the course actually run by the
Brooklyn between these two points, as he
was not able to indicate what that course
was. In asking the question the Judge ad-
vocate said he wanted the distance from
the blockadng station at Moro to the end
of the run, or until the Brooklyn stopped
at 1:15.
Captain Parker took exception to this
statement of the case, and said the Brook
lyn did not stop until about O'Clock. The
time lis pm, he said, was merely the
time when the Colon went ashore.
Port Engine the Texas.
Chief Machinist ]. L. Hunley, who testi-
fed Friday that he at the throttle Of
the port engine or the Texas during the
battle of July 3, and that that engine was
not stopped or backed during the battle.
when called to certify to the correctness
of his testimony, was further questioned
by the judge advocate. He said that he
had relieved Hill on the throttle of the
port engine after general quarters. He
was questioned closely to see whether dur
ing the battle he had left the throttle Of the
port engine to look at the blowers. but he
thought that he had not done so. The tes-
timony of Claxton, who had previously said
that he at the throttle and stopp d
and backed the engine, was called to his
attention and he insisted that he himself
was at the throttle during this period.
Q. (By the judge advocate)-Was your
hand on the throttle all the time? A. Very
nearly all the time.
Q. Do you think it possible that signal
was made to back without your knowing
it? A. l do not think so.
Q. How long had you been stationed on
n
been on board that vessel about two years
Q. Were you on board the Texas whe
she ran ashore In the harbor at Newport
r. l.?
objection by Mr.. Rayner.
Mr.. Rayner promptly objected to the ask
ing of this question. and said he did not
see what the running ashore Of a vessel at
Newport had to do with this case
The judge advocate said that II had a
very important connection with this case
as he proposed to show that the witness
had previously made mistakes in regard to -
signals which had resulted I'm disastrous
consequences Mr.. Rayner said that even
IL 1t were shown that he had made a mis-
take he did not see how that could be used
to contradict his testimony. The fact that
a man had made a mistake aid not convict
him of telling falsehood. and his testi-
mony before the court of inquiry simply re-
lated to statement of a fact.
Mr.. Rayner then argued against the ad-
mission of this question at some length
That negligence is shown, he said. could
not be used to affect the testimony OF a
witness. Because he had made a mistake