The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1901-12-18
SCHLEY'S BILL.
Exception to Courts Findings
Presented to Sec'y Long.

Washington. Dec. 1s.-Admiral Schley
late this afternoon through his counsel
presented to the secretary of the navy
his bill of ceptio to the findings or
the majority of the court OF inquiry
The bill claims that the majority of the
court gave their opinion that Commo-
dore Schley should have proceeded with
the utmost dispatch of CienfuegoS Wnen
there was no specification giving thts
point and without giving the applicant
opportunity to evidence on it, The facr
that no place was mentioned in what
was known as the McCalla memoran-
dunn, for meeting the insurgents. is re-
garded as a reason why
Communication was not held with the
insurgents and further that the SAID
memorandum was sent to CommOdOre
Schley only for use in connection with
the Information which it contained rel
alive to certain batteries at. or being
constructed in the vicinity of C1enfue-
gos- The bill further contends that
overwhelming evidence was presented
to the court to show that a close block
ade of Cienfuegos was maintaineds that
the majority Of the court entirely lg-
nored the uncontrad-cted testimony
proving that the British steamer Adula
was allowed to enter Cienfuegos to OBJ
tain Information regarding n Spanish
fleet; that the order of Admiral Samp-
son known as No. Z was an imperative
order for Commodore Schley to hold his
squadron Oft Cienfuegos whether the
Spanish feet was in that harbor, or
not, mat the majority Oh the court
have ignored the admitted fact that the
commander of the Eagle did not COM
municate the situation at C1enfuegos
to Commodore Schley; that they ig-
nored the fact that Captain Evans fall
ed to to
Schley the meaning of the signal lights
on shore at C~ienfuegoS; that COmmo-
dore Schley, as proven by the evidence
had no knowledge of these lights until
the night of May %. 1898; that the ma
jority of the court are silent in their
reference to marking the movements of
the flying squadron in front of Ctenfue-
gos; thai the majority based their
opinion as to the retrograde movement
upon the statement that Com modore
Schley before sailing from Cienfuegos
had reliable Information that snlps
could be coaled in the vicinity of Cape
Cruz and Gonaives channel, whereas it
is denied that there was any such posi-
show that not until three days after
leaving CienfuegoS did
Schley receive definite m con-
corning the feasibility or practical iity
of coaiing ships from a collier in
GonaiveS channel; that the majority
erred in stating that Commodore Schley
received no positive information from
the scout ships as to the enemyS pres
ence in Santiago harbor, because Capt
Sigsbee had reported to Commodore
Schley that h Spanish fleet was not
in that HarbOr.
The bill denies that the conditions of
wind, sea and eathe from May &c to
June l, were favorable for taking coal
from a collier off Santiago; 1t also
claims that the coal charts submitted
in evidence, showing the chasing capa-
city of the Flying Squadron have been
ignored; and that no reference has
been made to the orders of the secre-
tary of the navy f~orbidding the hazard
ing of American ships against shore
batteries; that the majority opinion
failed to contain any reference to the
character of the blockade of Santiago,
n1fhnr1Ch aOUnrnI in the qualifications
that the demonstration made by Com
modore Schley before Santiago on May
20 and 80 were predetermined and eX-
ecuted solely as a reconnaissance and
not as a formal attack upon the Colon,
Or the other vessels in the har-
Dor; that the majority opinion OF
spect to the loop of the Brooklyn
in that it holds that said loop was
mad to avoid getting in dangerous
proximity to the Spanish vessels with
to personal fears of Commodore Sohley
or to his desire to preserve the ship in
tact and ready for further work: that
the majority of the court entirely ig-
nored the overwhelming testimony in
arriving at the opinion that Commodore
Schley erred in commencing the en-
gagement on July 3 with the port bat
terry and that the Brooklyn did no lose
either distance or position with the
Spanish ships in making the turn; that
the majority opinion is ambigu-
Gus upon the subject OF the
backing of the Texas, in that it
does not state whether the danger of
collision was real or imaginary; that
Capt. Cooks testimony on this point
was entirely ignored; that the finding
with the Hodgson controversy has re-
peatedly been contradicted in the testi- |
ony that the majority opinion that
Commodore Schley's conduct was char
acterized by vacillation, dilatoriness
and lack of enterprise is not justified
by the evidence submitted: that the
majority opinion is entirely silent upon
a charge by the Judge advocate coming
within the purview of the first specih-
cation, that Commodore Schley was de-
reiict in the discharge of his duty; that
the majority of the court entirely fail |
ed to determine who was commander
in-chief in the battle of Santiago, which
finding was necessary to determine the
first specification of the precept as to
the conduct of Commodore Schley; that
the majority of the court have rejected
the whole of the testimony on behalf
of the applicant and the testimony of
the applicant himself and that by
so doing has perverted the ends
Of justice and deprived him of his COM
mon law and constitutional rights; that
he has been found guilty upon specifica-
lions substantially abandoned by the
Judge advocate, and that the testimony