The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1901-09-14
Il JUST DECISION.

The decision arrived at by the majority OF
gibihty of Admiral F1owison VIII beyond
doubt be concurred in by all who take
interest in the proceedings whether they
be partisans of Sampson or Schley or be
entirely disinterested as between those
two officers.
Beyond doubt Admiral Howson thought
himself fully qualified to sit in judgment
on his brother officer Schley. AS between
the accused officer and he who now
stands practically as his accuser before
the country there never was any doubt CT
the preference of Howison for Admiral
Sampson That circumstance did not of
itself lessen his fitness to discharge the
duties of the position of judge any more
than did the statement confessed by him
to have been his, that Sampson being the
commanding officer, was, unless special
circumstances were shown to warrant an
other conclusion, entitled to the honor OF
the victory at Santiago. Nor would both
of those statements in the opinion of the
Globe suffice to warrant the conclu-
sion that Admiral Howison was disquaH-
fed
The testimony of three witnesses which
stood uncontradicted on the record
showed that as between the accused and
accuser in this case the feelings of Adj
miral Howison were strongly enlisted in
the cause of the accuser, and that he did
declare himself to be the partisan of that
officer, and did so with so much decision
as to leave little doubt that his partisan
ship was of that intense kind that rem
dered him incapable of Riding his mind
of the bias which he entertained.
The l o b declared its belief at the
outset that the representatives of Adj
miral Schley had the fullest justification
for the challenge of Admiral Howson.
The event proves us to have been right.
Yet the decision reached does not i'm
pugn the perfect good faith of the dis
carded member of the court He was
chosen to that duty. He believed him
self competent in every particular to dis
charge it. We are all. consciously. or un-
consciously, partisans sions.saA disputed
questions. At the present moment tie
entire country" may be said to be divided
into two camps in connection with the
issues in this case-the one division
standing for Sampson; the other for
Schley. Yet it may be fairly assumed
that but few of US, however ardent our
partisanship may be or may have been,
will admit that we are incapable of do
ing exact justice as between the TWO
men.
Thus far the advantage has been in
every direction with the accused officer
in this controversy. Public opinion has
shown a decided bias in his favor The
country is convinced that he is one of
the bravest men in the service, land as
brave as any who ever in any capacity
risked his life i'm the discharge of his
duty. His partfsans have from time 10
time put forward statements and theo-
ries in the public press and elsewhere
in his behalf which would condemn any
case less just than his. They have. in
deed gone so far as to declare their
unwilhngness to abide by the decision
arrived at unless it was one which would
completely exonerate Admiral Schley
from all blame and yield to him all the
honor of the victory at Santiago
We can pass over all this sort of thing
readily. The majority of the court IN
this case has already shown that it is
bound to mete out exact justice
under all circumstances They are men
of great technical knowledge and expe-
rience, and of the highest integrity
personal and professional In all human
probability they will soon have asso-
ciated with them man equally lust ana
capable. Their verdict, whatever it
may be, or whether favorable to Samp-
son or to Schley, will be the verdict of
the country, and both of those officers
must stand or fall by that verdict. Meth
er political nor personal partisanship will
find itself ever able to rise above that
verdict.