The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1901-10-01

! De1ore, responded Mr. RaynOr.
| on have read it three times to me,
so that you cannot say that you never
read the statement before"
Admiral Dewey-Remarks will be
Iconhned to questions and answers.
Kept Watch on Spaniards.
Admiral Evans then. in response to a
question from Mr.. Raynor, said that he
had been called to the deck of the Iowa
! on the evening of July by Lieutenant
Hill, who was the deck officer, and who
/ had called his attention to columns of
smoke rising from the entrance to the
harbor- The lieutenant had remarked
that it was his opinion that the Span
iards were preparing to come out, but
he (Admiral EVans) expressed the opin-
ion that they were only shifting their
| berths, as they had done on previous
! occasions. However. the signal at that
! time had been prepared and was kept
In readiness all night, saying that the
enemy was escaping.
Mr.. RaynOr then surrendered the wit
ness temporarily, saying that he would
have further questions to ask, but that
he desired some time to prepare them
1t was arranged that these questions
could be deferred until tomorrow, and
in the meantime Captain LemIy made
some interrogations before the redirect
examination.
He asked: Under what instructions,
verbal. written or by signal from the
nagshtp Brooklyn, did you maneuver
the Brooklyn during the naval battle
on Santiago harboD Of July 3, 1882
never saw any signal from her. I
old not maneuver in obedience to any
signal from the Brooklyn. did not see
any signals aboard her"
ANY written or verbal instructIons?''
None whatever
what instruction, oral or written.
ala you have from Commodore Schley
relative to the order of blockade or
order of battle while a part of the fly
ing squadron
Order of Blockade.
The order of blockade was to form
column double distance and cruise in
that formation"
Was there any prescribed order of
battle by which you would have been
guided If the enemy's ships had come
out Of Santiago harbor prior to June
II. 1882
There was none"
Returning to the departure Of the
flying squadron from Cienfuegos. Mr.
Hanna asked: What steps were TAX
en-, II any, to mask the movements of
that squadron in accordance with or
ders?'
There were no lights shown on the
flying squadron on blockade, except, I
believe, we did have a light in the stern
of each ship"
BY the court-Was any further effort
mIie by the flying squadron to destroy
the Colon?
None. if by further you mean the
WAS the fire of the enemy's batter
les on the 31st heavy enough to serious
ly endanger the attacking ship"
No, sir; it was not heavy at all. The
projectiles mostly fell a long way short
of us. Two, I think, passed over my
ship"
an the attack on the Colon on May
81 did any of the enemy's shell fail
near the squadron"
Two. 1 think. fell near the Iowa"
Iowa Came Home Coaled.
Would it have been possible for the
Iowa to coal from the Merrimac on the
afternoon Of May 26?"
1T would have been"
DO you know of any reason why the
ships could not get nearer the Colon
on May 31?"
81 know of no reason why they could
not"
do you know whether there is good
anchorage under the lee of Jardinallas
bank where large vessels would be
sheltered from westerly winds?''
81 do not"
Are you familiar with the southern
coast of Cuba between Cienfuegos and
Santiago?"
Fairly familiar with it; yes, sir
Are there any positions between
ICtenfuegOs and the neighborhOod of
Santiago where vessels can coal in
rough weather."
Between Cienfuegos and Santiago I
know of no place where they could coal
in rough weather"
was there any period between May
"a and May &c when the Iowa could not
have coaled from the collier Merri-
mac?"
she could not have coaled from s
o'clock in the morning of the 25th until
is or O'Clock on the morning of the
26th. when it moderated"