The Oskaloosa herald. (Oskaloosa, Mahaska County, Iowa) 1885-1919, 1901-10-10
THE scHLEY INQUIRY.
Lieutenant Commander Hodgson Pro-
duees some correspondence on
an Alleged CoIIoquy.

Washington, Oct. 7.-Lieutenan
Commander Hodgson, formerly navi
gator of Commodore Schley's flagship
the Brooklyn, continued his testimony
before the Schley court of inquiry Sat
urday, after some of the other wit
nesses of Friday had been given al
opportunity to correct their testi
mony.
There is much interest in Friday:
episode concerning Admiral Sampson
and there is still doubt as to whether
he will be witness. 1t viii remain
with Admiral Schley and his counsel
to say for what day, if for any, he shall
be called. The controversy as to the
admiraPs meaning in his Dear
Schley" dispatch of May 20 has in
no wise been abated by the tentative
agreement as to his being summoned.
Counsel on both sides Saturday morn
ing had before them copies of the dis
patch and each was trying strenuously
to bring the other to their view of the
| case.
Extracts from the evidence given
| Saturday are as follows:
Lieutenant Commander ALBION c. Hodg-
son was asked by Capt. Lemly about his
correspondence with Admiral schley con-
corning what the Judge advocate denom-
mated a newspaper "Colloquy." The wit
ness took exception to the use of the
word "colloquy" and Capt. Lemly reply
that this was the witness own characteri-
cation.
The letters were then read by the Judge
advocate, Commander Hodgson Identify
Ing the various documents as they were
separately presented. Mr.. Rayner said
that If desired the letters would be accept
ed as evidence and that they could be
printed without being read. Capt. Lemly
replied however, that he considered that
the letters have an important bearing upon
the precept and that therefore he pre-
ferred TO read them.
While the reading Of the letters between
Admiral Schley and Lieutenant Com
mander HOdgson and newspaper articles
bearing upon the CORE spondence was in
progress, Mr.. Rayner objected to the read
ing Of one of the newspaper statements as
Irrelevant The reading had required con-
siderable time.
Admiral Dewey said: "Those things could
all have been printed. You are taking
valuable time here. We want facts-facts.
We don't want newspaper articles We
have ruled these out. Cannot these mat
tiers be printed"
Capt. Lemly-Then they would be in evil
dence. Do you mean you don't want them
at all?
Admiral Dewey-We want them. Could
not they be printed like other papers?
Mr., Rayner-We want everything that
passed between Lieut.. HodgsOn and Com
modore SChley that appertains to this con-
troversy, but we would not like this record
to contain editorials against Commodore
Schley. l do not think there ought TO be
printed in the record an editorial against
Admiral SChley or any other admiral or In
favor of him which was never seen by Ad-
miral Schley at all. That article was not
sent in any letter to Admiral Schley. He
says not.
Capt. Ltmly-It is really a part of the
correspondence and referred TO. We do
not contend for one moment that any al
legations that may be made in that editor
ial against Admiral SChley are proof of
what these allegations are. but this Is a
part of the correspondence and necessary
in determining as to what was the pro-
priety of Commodore Schley's conduct
in the premises.
Mr.. Rayner-Would you take a state
meut from me now that Admiral SChley
says he never saw il and never received it?
Judge Advocate-YOu have made that
statement.
Mr.. Rayher-1 do not think this record
ought to be stained with these calumnies
against Admiral Schiey.
The court then retired for consultation
and after a few minutes returned, making
the following announcement through Ad-
miral Dewey: THE court decides that any
clippings from newspapers which form a
part of the correspondence between Ad-
miral Schley and Lieutenant Hodgson,
should properly be made"
Mr.. RayHer-May it please the court
there is no evidence to show that this par
ticular editorial forms part of the corre-
spondence or that it was ever received by
Admiral SChley.
Admiral Dewey-Uuder that ruling it
ought not to be read.
After the further reading of letters and
before the entire correspondence had been
exhibited the court at one o'clock adj
journed until Monday.
During the early part Of Saturdays sit
ting Capt. Lemly again brought up the
question Of the difference of construction
of the last paragraph of the dear Schley"
letter. He produced the original copy.
Capt. Lemly then said: "lf the court
please, l was yesterday requested by
counsel for the applicant to produce the
original of the letter from Admiral Samp-
son to Commodore Schley, dated May 20,
1893, the question being IS TO the final name
at the end OF the first paragraph, whether
1t should be 'Cienfuegos' or Santiago. l
have the original and the name appears
Santiago and appears over an erasure. !
invite attention to the fact that in the
press copy book 1t is Santiago, which
shows that the change was made before the
letter was press copied and sent. l will
add that the punctuation is as stated
yesterday in the press copy.
He also at the request OF Admiral Schley's
counsel introduced another copy "in
which" he said, you will see there was no
correction. 1t appeared originally as
Santiago"