Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1901-11-07
THE CONCLUDING
ARGUMENT MADE.
.Judge-Advocate Lemly Closed for Navy De-
partment Reviews Points for Appli-
cant, Then Presents His Side.

Ing himself into the presence OF the
| enemy
| LEMLY EXPLAINS HIS POSITION.
Capt Lemly said:
with the conclusion Of the very brief
address with which | shall close the
argument in this inquiry, my principal
connection with II ceases and the mat
ter Is In your capable hands. | may
add that while my duties here have
been arduous and necessarily somewhat
painful, am proud to have been ASSOC
ciated with this distinguished court.
which is to pass upon the most import
ant question ever considered by a
naval court--a question as | defined II
In the early course Of the proceedings,
between the applicant and the morale
OF the service. In entering upon my
duties as judge advocate of the court,
had In mind advice given me by the
secretary OF the navy soon after my APP
pointment as follows. Admiral Schley
asks for court OF inquiry, A per-
fectly impartial court Is constituted.
The judge advocate and any counsel
assisting him. are not, (hnd their duty
In this respect is plain in court TO pro-
secute anybody or 10 find anybody gull
ty, but to bring out the facts and aid
the court in declaring the truth.
II have endeavored to follow this ad-
vice without fear or favor. II have
appeared 10 fail in maintaining that
impartial attitude which feel and have
always felt towards the applicant. II Is
because aggression, however natural
on the part Of earnest counsel begets
aggression. and for the further reason
that In many instances throughout the
investigation honest difference Of opin-
ion has compelled me to be earnestly
contentious In order to adduce
what I believed to be material
facts. deemed 1t not in
appropriate ! should here remark
that the navy department In this mat
ter has maintained an entirely neutral
attitude; that ] have not been inter-
fered with by II in any conduct Of the
case; that. as the record demonstrates,
there has been no alteration Of the de-
partment's records; that officers on
duty even In the much-abused bureau
Of navigation, have freely testified Ia
behalf Of the applicant and | am conf
dent that the evidence adduced fully
justified the views Of the department,
set forth In its reply Of February 8,
1899. TO the Senate committee on naval
AFFAIRS wherein Il Is said Of Commodore
Schley. referring particularly TO the
naval battle of July 3. 1898;
DEPARTMENTS VIEWS QUOTED.
"'Where so much was achieved Ia
this eliminating battle and where his
ship was such conspicuous force In
the fight, his conduct while In inde-
pendent command prior to June |. the
record Of which has been given above
and which. by reason OF its pnsteadi-
ness In purpose and push and In failure
TO obey orders. did not meet the APP
proval OF the President and the depart
ment. has yet not permitted II 10 stand
In the way OF his nomination for promo.
ton TO a higher grade for the part he
took In the final triumph,
Capt, Lemly then said that the vol
luminous evidence had been so fully
treated In all it, bearings that II was
not his purpose to enter upon de-
tailed discussion of II. He said that UNI
der the then existing conditions Of the
wind and weather greater speed might
have ben maintained on the passage OF
the flying squadron from Key West 10
Cienfuegos. IT should, he thought, be
remembered that Commodore Schley's
orders required that the blockade OF
that port be established with the least
possible delay.
Reference was made to the interview
with Capt. Chester. OF the Cincinnati.
on this trip. and Capt. Lemly said
Already, as appeared from their con-
versation. Commodore Schley. though
treasured by Capt Chester, was trou-
bled In his own mind over coal condi-
tons and the problem Of coalng at sea.
demonstrating that at the very offset
he was brewing trouble"