The Savannah morning news. (Savannah, Ga.) 1900-current, 1901-10-29

West to Cienfuegos. Mr.. Rayner sug-
gested the precept did not cover this
matter, but the court decided that the
inquiry might be made. Capt. LeT1iiy
asked why the Iowa had gained four
teen hours on the squadron.
THE only reason 1 can give" said
the admiral. lis that she stood direct
ly across from Key West to Havana;
also that in shore the current would
net be as strong as II was off shore.
Then probably she may have steamed
out of the current after she got
around"
Capt Lemly asked:
"Why did you not make an effort to
ascertain whether the Spanish fleet
was in Cienfuegos?"
II made a distinct effort on May %
by allowing the Adula to go in"
"You regard that as the best effort
that could have been made?"
II do, inasmuch as she was to come
out the day following"
The admiral was then questioned as
| to the orders he received by the Hawk.
| He remembered dispatch No. dis
| tinctly.
when you received that order why
did you not proceed to Santiago?"
The Order Was Conditional.
Simply because the order was con-
| ditional. When became satisfied that
the fleet was not at Cienfuegos 1 was
directed to proceed to Santiago"
Capt. Lemly asked the witness as to
why he questioned the credibility OF
some of the reports concerning the To-
cation of the Spanish fleet which came
from Admiral Sampson.
"On account of the implied doubt in
the mind of the commander-in-chi as
shown by the language of the dis
patch"
How long did you intend to remain
at Cienfuegos?"
my intention was to remain until we
got something more definite"
How did you expect to get more de-
finite Information
From the Adula when she came
OUT
what ether steps had you then in
mind to ascertain the presence of the
enemy's ships?"
I'm the meantime Mccalla came up.
If he had not come and the Adula had
not come out should probably have
sent one of the smaller vessels to the
westward on account of the McCalla
memorandum"
THE memorandum had arrived on
the 23rd. had it not? ?"
Yes"
Had you sent out boat?"
81 had not. largely because of the
surf, which made it hazardous"
In reply to questions from Capt.
Lernly Admiral Schley said that on
May 20 he had gone in near enough to
the shore at Cienfuegos to see things
| distinctly on the shore.
Were there anything to prevent
your going nearer shore?''
Nothing except that the land was
very low and did not give room to
maneuver."
did you make any effort to cornmu-
nicate with the insurgents on May %
or May "a before the arrival of the
Marblehead?"
mo. sent the Marblehead into the
harbor. I regarded that as the best
method for ascertaining whether the
fleet was inside"
when Capt. McCalla gave you the
information with regard to the Spanish
fleet not being in Cienfuegos, did you
determine to leave for Santiago that
day"
81 think I did. That is my impress
sion.. ! remember to have sent a dis
patch in which I said that / might
leave In the morning. I had in view
at that time the return Of the Scor-
pfon. which I sent east, feeling that
she might bring me some necessary in
formation"
Capt. Lemly here introduced two dis
patches dated May "a. in which Admiral
Schley said he would proceed eastward
the next day.
schley Defends His Course.
Closing his testimony for the day,
Admiral Schley said he had anticipated
difficulties in coaling at Santiago, and
while these difficulties had been en-
countered they had also been overcome
He said he had detached the Eagle
from the squadron because she was an
impediment and could not be carried
along. He said likewise that he did
not think IL would be wise to detach
the Vixen and the Merrimac from the
fleet EN- route to Santiago.
He also defended his line OF forma-
ton on the cruise from Cienfuegos as
the wisest possible one. Admiral
Schley said that he had asked to have
colliers sent TO Gonaives Bay because
he did not believe they would be able
70 coal In the open sea. He said he had
never contemplated taking more than
one vessel al time away from the
blockading line