The Washington times., 1901-09-26

WOULD OBJECT unless the Dear Scuiey
letter were read This is letter from
Sampson to Schley dhen at Cienfuegosl'
dated May 90 1898 which Schley in his
written defence to the Senate claimed
confused the situation and threw grave
doubts over the location of the Spanish
feet" This letter was delivered to Schie!
with other dispatches of later date. May
u. in which Sampson says;
IF YOU are satisfied that they the enc
my are not at Cienfuegos, proceed WIN
all despatch, but cautiously. TO SantiaSo
de Cuba. and il the enemy Is there piocH 'tlTa
ade him in port and this Will enapie n
you - to leave Santiago a m. May y,,Id "a
II is thought the Spanish squadron "o"'"
probably be still at Santiago. L.,
The Dear Schley" letter was not IN
cluded in the reports printed by the ue-
partment and the department s,'a, mas ai~aSs ~
claimed that it was never received Tor
CAPTAIN Parker, of Admiral Sclleys
cour,sel, with evident reference 10 tne
fact mat the department claimed not TO
have the letter. made the remark IN
low tone following Mr.. .Rayners ob)ection,
that of conrbe this despatch would not pc
found. Thid aroused Captain LemIy, VINO
denounced II as one of several improper
comments on the part of the junior couh-
sci for theG applicant, ana expresseo 'he
hope that the Court would stop II
THE Court. Remarked Admiral Dewey,
nodding his head approvingiy to captain
Lemly, agrees with you that such inter-
ruptions are entirely improper.
Mr. Rayner questioned Admiral Cotton
closely as to thS dispatches delivered TO
Admiral Schey on the nth OF May. anu
stated that the witness must be mistaken
as to delivering some of those despatches
which in fact bore later date Admiral
Cotton summed up his various answers
| with this statement
"The despatch dated Washington. May
| %. addressed, to Cotton, Harvard and
| signed Long rwas delivered by me on the
| morning of May 81 to Commodore Scniey
| at 5 o'cISck off Santiago. IL received
| these two other dispatches prior 10 3
O'Clock on May 30. 1898, they were deiiv-
| cred to Commodore Schley on the morn
| ing of May 81, 1898.
| which you say you delivered on the 3lst
| of May provided that copies were sent
you to Kingston. Are you not mistaken
| about the dates of some of them?
| Admiral Cotton-Under my oath | make
| this statement: | delivered to Commodore
| Schley On the morning OF May - on
| Santiago more than two despatches. 80
\ far as 1 know, l delivered to Commodore
| Schley that morning two despatcnes,
! one from the Navy Department and one
| from the commander-in-ehief OF the
| that / delivered mere than two de-
| spatches. L think it very likely that L
delivered some dispatches. perhaps Two
| or three, that were addressed to me-
The dispatches. about the delivery of
\ which to Admiral Schley. by Captain
| Cotton Mr.. Rayner had raised a qres-
| tion, directed that Schley he informed
| that he must find out whether Cervera
| was at Santiago. that he must surmount
| difficulties in regard to coaling. that he
| must not leave, the vicinity of Santiago.
| unless II was unsafe for his squadron.
and If obliged to leave must sink col
| lier in the mouth of the harbor to keep
| the Spanish ships from escaping; that 1t
| was Schley's duty to ascertain immedi-
| ately II the Spanish fleet was in Santi-
| ago.
No Absolute Knowledge.
Mr.. Rayner having led the witness to
| the statement that the Harvard had
reached off Santiago on the 24th of June,
! asked: 'pid you know that the Spanish
| feet was inside the harbor Of Santiago
| on the 18th of June?''
The answer was, Il did not
| Q.-Do you know of any other officer
| who knew that the Spanish feet was in
| side the harbor of Santiago at that time d?
Al know of no officer then present
| off Santiago, who knew absolutely of the
| presence of the Spanish fleet in the har-
Dor of Santiago.
To Mr. Rayner Admiral Cotton repeated
his statement that the Harvard could
have been coaled at sea on May. 23 one
of the days on which Schley said he could
| not coal, and the day he turned back
/ for Key West
MIR. Rayner-You say you could have
coaled from the Merrimac? Why didn't
| you coal?
Admiral Cotton-In the first place. had
u. L
going somewhere else for COAL and, in
the third, the fleet needed the coal.
Q.-Did you ask permission of Admiral
| Schley to coal?
+ Al did not
Mr.. Rayner read a letter from Admiral
| Schley to two Cuban journals at Santiago
introducing Nuhez. a Cuban pilot, and
| suggesting that signals be displayed by
| the Cubans ashore at Santiago TO indi-
cate whether the Spanish fleet was there.
This was introduced to show that Admiral
, Schley had not agreed to let Lieutenant
! Beaie go ashore to get Information be-
| cause he had already selected a Cuban
for that purpose. Nunez was the pilot of
| whom Admiral Schley became suspicious
and refused to trust.
There was another legal interchange here
/ over the attempt of Captain Lemly to
j Rad from the appendix despatch ad-
| dressed to Admiral Cotton by Admiral
Sampson at Mole St. Nicholas for delivery
to Admiral Schley. Mr.. Rayner objected
| saying the originals must be produced.
Captain Lemly insisted that he would
produce the originals of everything and
accused the other side of having suggest
| ed the use OF the appendix Captain LemIy
| then produced paper, which, he said,
was the original of the cipher message.
Mr.. Rayner asked why 1t had not been
given the applicant before.
| Because" said the judge advocate "I
never saw it until this minute. and it's all
| gibberish. anyhow. It's in cipher"
This despatch proved one of the most
! important documents introduced. The
/ original telegram delivered to Captain
| Cotton at Mole st. Nicholas had Been re-
| tained by him and the Navy Department
had never had any evidence that 1t was
| ever delivered TO Admiral Schley. Ad-
| uiiral Cotton swore yesterday that he had
| delivered 1t to Admiral Schley the
| morning of May q. Its Importance lies
| in the fact that whereas previous de-
| spatches had not told Admiral Schley
| positively that the Spanish squadron was
| at Santiago this one did say so. The de-
| spatch as translated from the cipher (er-
rors not corrected) is follows:
| TRANSLATION, Cable No. 10.
| Received from Sampson by Har-
ward at Nicholas Mole, May 25, 1898,
1880 m.
THE Spanish squadron at Santiago
| if previous to May 10 scout off San
| tiago-communicate with Schley II he
| tthey) moves west. Schley is expected
May "a at Santiago from Cienfuegos.
Cuba. Telegraph me from Nicholas
| Mole to Key West II he (they) move
| east and leave letter for Schley, then
go off Santiago to meet him / shall
| be Cay Francis with squadron If two
I scouts are available one shi:uld keep
touch with the Spanish squadron.
| SAMPSON
| The Judge advocate will claim that be-
| fore leaving Santiago for Key West leav-
| ing the harbor unguarded, Schley knew
| positively that Cervera was at Santiago.
After Admiral Schley and his lawyers
| had inspected the cipher despatch and its
| translation minutely the despatch was
| placed In evidence. Admiral Cotton testi-
| fled that the despatch was received at
| Mole ST Nicholas and handed to him with
a translation made by Lieutenant Beale,
of the Harvard, and he said that was one
| of the dispatches delivered by him to