Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1901-10-31
poard in order to meet the movements
Of the enemy's ships.
Reasons for the Loop

BOARD in order to meet the movements
of the enemy's ships.
Reasons for the Loop.
Admiral Schley in response to a
question said he never heard of the
Texas incident until six months after
the battle. He was closely questioned
as to the order which went below "to
stand by to ram" In answer to a
question he said he supposed the ce3-
cain had given the order. His atten-
tion was called to a letter Of June 3,
1900, written from the South Atlantic
station, in which the admiral was
quoted as saying that the turn was
made to avoid the last attempt of the
Viscaya to ram. His attention was
next called to his letter to the senate
in which he said the turn was made to
avoid blanketing the fire of his own
ships, and also to his statement in eX
animation in chief that he had not
turned to port because to do so would
have brought the ship into dangerous
proximity to tho enemy's vessels and
exposed her to possible torpedo attack
or ramming.
Regarding his report sent from
Guantanamo Admiral Schley said the
whole thing could be explained by per-
mitting him to introduce a preliminary
report made and returned. Captain
Lemly objected and he and MIR. Ray
ner continued the discussion of the
subject for some time. The former
charged that Mr.. Rayner's purpose was
to interfere with the cross -eXamina-
tion. Admiral Dewey finally put an
end to the discussion by saying that
if there was NO objection to bringing
in the report at another time it could
be brought in at this point. There
upon Captain Lemly withdrew his OBJ
lection.
"The damage already has been
done," said he. "it is for the purpose of
destroying the order Of the cross-ex-
animation and that is now accom-
plished. He already has accomplished
all the damage he can do"
Court Upholds LemIy.
After recess Captain Lemly laid be-
fore the court Admiral Schley's press
copy book contak1ing copy of his
letter embracing his first report to
Admiral Sampson of the battle of
Santiago, which had been returned.
There was more contention between
counsel as to the admissability of the
document as evidence. The decision
of the courb was to the effect that the
letter could not be read aloud.
After some further jsparring by coun-
sci Admiral Schley explained that the
original preliminary report of the bat
tie he took to the commander-in-chief
and then returned to the Brooklyn
admiral Sampson then signalled to
me to come on board again." he said.
(which I did and he handed the report
back to me- There was nobody but
himself and myself in the cabin at
that time and from the conversation
had with him, was led to believe"
Captain Lemly-"We want the con-
versation.'
"He handed it back to me with the
statement that he was commander-in-
| chief and that I had omitted a very
important detail-that the New York
was not present. I felt that the vic
tory at that time, as I said, was big
enough for all and l made this out of
generosity and because l knew if the
New York had been present she would
have done as good work as anybody
else.. Ss*tY our command l referred to
throughout this. his appearance and
SO. on. in complimentary terms. That
was the reason"
The admiral was asked what con-
versation be had with Lieutenant
Comm ander Hodgson on the Brooklyn
just before the loop was made. He
said he ,coul~ not recall a single word
of conversation with Mr.. Hodgson be-
yond the latter's remark that the enc
| my were coming for them and his re-
sponse to go for them, except some re-
| mark about the proximity of the Tex
as. He did not now recall and he new
er had been able to recall colloQuy
= Court Asks Some Questions.
At 2:25 p. NJ Captain Lemly con-
cluded his cross-examination which
had been begun at the beginning of
the morning session of Monday.
Captain Lemly said-"I have no
| further questions"
| He turned to Mr.. Rayner, who said:
"We have not a single question"
1.-THE court has a few" said Admiral
Dewey. The following questions
We're then asked
"Had Admiral Cervera's fleet left
Santiago and gone to the westward ait
the same time that you left Genfue-
gos could it not have passed between
your fleet and the shore without being
seen by you?"
'"At night: it might possibly have
done so, but I think not in the day
time" .5yt| ! <''' ? r%s' u
why, on May 26, did you make your
stopping point 20 miles south of San
tiago Instead of the mouth of the har-
! bor?" 5+s .. A F
ri laid my course for that point,
| thinking THAI If the Spanish fleet
should leave Santiago he would go
southwark and that point would give
me wider horizon for observing his
movements" Gf5a r
f "Was it not possible to begin your
blockade of Santiago May 26 and main
lStain it for q few days and still have
! coal enough left to enable you to
reach Key West ?"3 ~ / Il s$j.. .zs5s
il i had then known. as !
knew subsequently, that the Spanish
fleet was there" ,e. %d%..E @$t53s.. St}
WAS not the situation at Santiago,
May 26, such as to warrant YOU In TAX
fiag cnnsid deFable risk In coaling the
Iships Of your squadron O. NJ, 4t q " W.
" ,.seJS 1y,1r~