The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-10-17
NAVAL BATTLE RE-FOUGHT
All Say the Admiral's Actions Were Most Courageous.
Schley Encouraged His Men During Fight by Shouting "Give Elm He'll, Bullies"-Cook and
 Sears Are Recalled.


 Washington, Oct. 16.-The officers Of Admiral Schley's flagship. the Brooklyn. occupied the attention of the Schley court of inquiry for the entire day. The proceedings began with the recall of Cap tain Cook and Lieutenant Commander Sears, both of whom made material addi- tions to their former testimony. and they were followed in succession by Comman- der N. E. Mason, who was the executive officer of the Brooklyn, Lieutenant Ed ward McCauley, Jr.. who was signal of- ficer and Lieutenant Charles Webster. who had charge of the forward gun deck battery of the Brooklyn during the battle off Santiago and was a watch officer on board that ship. Captain Cooks new tes- timony related to the uncoupling of the Brooklyn's engines, and to the voyage of the flying squadron from Cienfuegos to Santiago, explaining in some detail the cause of the slow progress made on that occasion.
 Commander Sears spoke again of the conversation reported as having taken place between himself and officers of the MdSSaCnuSeLtS Tn the ward room or that vessel May 31, in which he was alleged to have said that it had been difficult to get Commodore Schley up to the point of undertaking the bombardment of the Co., lon, and he again denied that he had said anything refiecting upon his superior of- fcer.
 Commander Mason and Lieutenants Mc- Cauley and Webster all gave accounts of the engagement of July B. MT. McCauley recited in detail the signals made in con nection with that historical event at the instance of Commodore Schley. When asked If Commodore Schley had said any thing during the battle for the encouf- agement of the men, this witness replied that he several times had said: Give lem hell, bullies-" All these witnesses testified that the conduct of the Commo' dore under fire was cool and courageous
 Opening of the Court.
 The Schley court of inquiry began pro, ceedings today as usual with the correc. ton of testimony given on the previous day the witnesses summoned for this purpose being Captain Cook and Lieu tenant Commander Sears, who testified yesterday.
 When they had left the stand Comman- der Newton E. Mason, who was executive officer of the Brooklyn during the war with Spain, was called to relate his obser- yations of the conduct of the Santiago campaign
 It is the purpose of Mir. Raynor to first examine officers of the Brooklyn and to follow those with a number of those who were on the Oregon during the battle of Santiago. It Is understood that his entire list of witnesses Is practically confined to persons who were on board these two ves- eels.
 In connection with today's proceedings, MT Raynor presented number of ques- tions to the court which he said he de- sired to ask one of Admiral Schleys wit nesses concerning certain signals which were sent from Admiral Sampson's flag ship the New York, on the morning of July B. before that vessel left for Sibo- ney for the purpose of allowing the Con- mander-in-Chief of the naval forces to consult with General Shafter. These sig nals. MT. Raynor contends. had the eff feet of placing the entire fleet under the command of Commodore Schley and on this account he urges their relevancy.
 Captain Cook Recalled.
 While Captain Cook occupied the wit ness stand for the purpose of correcting his hestimony. MT. Hanna asked him:
 "Referring to your statement In regard to the steam required to be kept up in connection with the uncoupling of the Brooklyn's engines that it was the order of the Commander-in-C hief while lying of Santiago on the Dlockaue. was tna1 written order?"
 My recollection Is that 1t was a bulle- tin. The exact words I do not remem- ber."
 'The particular point was with respect to the uncoupling of the engines Was there anything in that order on this sub- ject and in pursuance of which that was done?'
 My impression is that there was. They aII as I understand it, had their engines uncoupled"
 'It Is a general recollection of 1t only? Yes. that we should have our forward engines uncoupled all the time"
 Gan you aid us any in identifying the bulletin from your impressiOn?"
 No We could not have moved the four engines with the steam we carried. know that We had an order about the speed. It was In a circular bulletin
 Captain Cook also was questioned again concerning the voyage of the flying squadron from Cienfuegos to Santiago, as follows:
 Did the flying squadron, when proceed. ing from Cienfuegos to Santiago, proceed with all dlspatch?"
 Throwing out of consideration the sur rounding circumstances and conditions that have already been testified to, should say no"
 Mir. Raynor: But putting in the sur.  you would say yes would you not"
 Yes"
 What do you mean by the surrounding circumstances and conditions?"
 Trip Was Very Slow.
 T mean that as I understand the ques- ton. we could have gone from Cienfuegos to Santiago and arrived there the next day after we left Cienfuegos with some if not all our larger vessels"
 
 ditions you speak of?''
 ''The coaling conditions that existed al the time. We certainly could not have made the dispatch by turning back"
 What do you mean when you speak Oi turning back?" "
 T mean that We went to the eastward with the two columns and that then, be- ing unable to coal the Texas as I have stated before, we turned back for that