The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1901-09-24

captain Fhilip, lie sltdt ~ ! nave @'dltu
before. that ! was not 10 look after the
NOV many signals did the New Ygk
mike 20 the Texas on tue day Of the NJ.
tot' asked Mr.. Haynes
! don't know" was the response.
,Did Sue make any slguaAs 10 the yeNasf'
- saw sisnals from the New york.,
Objection was made 10 this line Of qucS-
tiouue and the question was withdrawn
temporarily. the court then took reeese
When court .reconSencd, Mr Ilayu9r CON
tnued the ,c4ss examination of Cohinan-
der HeiinSe He asked espegiaily coneerA
ting0 exhibiting the chart The witness
snid he had been one of The board Of nari.
gatofs who had prepared the chart ana
MIR. Hanna iutcrpoSed to say hat N the
roiut inteuded to be made was mat l9e
chart Is Inaccurate, the government Wonid
couccde at once that this was true.
1t Is great pity you never conceded
that before, said MIR. Rayncr
Mr.. Rayncr then commented quite vigur-
ously upon the fact thH tho chart was an
I'hc witness was asked 10Y Mr. Rayner
concerning the St0ppago of the Texas Nhth
the Brooklyn appeared iu front of her.
THE signals the witness answered
were 10 SLOW. stop aud hack one right
on top of the other, before could say a
word in between
Does anything appear in your log about
that asked Mr Rayner
moi > "n TX lor 'S IAN teil Van Why il was
not because Captain l'htlip said az did not
Hbe to have anything tn ". | swore to inc
Jnt ,,, n J.,,I man to sTbstnntinto
anything ! said, and t1at ! would not bring
Mp this point and | am sorry, I brought y
up, but Captain philip SAID he wound NOT
put ~ IN his official report
hrierrl ~ 20 tne eiHise I" HaH t5 boG
Mi,nrsS '' h Nv 49,, NJ ~, 9Sa, hin ifa rl,
lllI,{t'gl az ~ ,J,a, ,,, r,tl5aiF Nerrftngt
iu'ih ,'eI"u hlSr 'N',' t"s 80, t,iir T.,
nv NV ~, -, U' S,n,, sgntis.o ON Nav "
thc HsNlN"iu I'm 49,, ,i -, IN En,,.
, L1lu wv. ~ my .S GAttics" asipd
10 1o'k :, gu 'u' "'' va '"'
dd not t rsSGiye NM, aFX 1s9 l5 from from
tIat Her r,,,,i' 81 ,bc ,gtne Si'''
me witness blsn 7a5u INV In' ~ snop,
h2d ~ e,luS Wy w , ~ ,,., ,''r ''''
Captain Lcmly mere intrrlo9'T u" IN Ui,' ,"g
/, purpose OF we inquiries I"" WI. ~ ~! , ,,'
slairl tn''t u "ns 10 bf U.'' i,cp.G. md
Sampson'F 9locbn1e' ,tt5uSo ~ III 'mIiN ~
shown Sealey ni"eLa4' VIZ ylnJ ..n'
SIMPSONS he coma NOT ne ''"S'''r'' ''H'
, snruhle. n...
He also said that II woud hy shown ihat
. the Colon was visible Wheh Aaihlri' """lp
SON came mp.
Captain Lemly objected NOT onl5 TO- me
line OF questions hut 10 the line oi afSu
merit. a.., ....,.,.
Roplying, Mr., Rayner sad bat n9lWltn.
lemGy to keen Admiral sampson OUT or
the controversy, he would Inevitably ne
brought Into it. NOT Tor the purpose OF crii,
icjSm, hut Tor the purpose OF SAoMhg ~
mirnl Schlcy had merely ohoyNd the orders
/ Of his superior officer. VINO was ADMIRAL
| Sampson. 10 doing what he had dorc.
| Continuing, MI. Eayner said mat Ad'
mir1l Schley wanted 10 prove lAtee thihSh'
| These were:
! !. II il malntamcd that me blockade as
maintained by Commodore Schlcy was the
same. so far rs distances were concerned
! as that maintained bv Admiral sampson.
| . The failure to engage the Colon fur
| Their ON May ~ was in the line OF Sainp
| sons policy Ms developed after his afriVa
| ON June / when the Colon was sui In
| eight
! =. lhat me Br"yEiyn nHa ner plSet ~
Hben ths Spanisb ieet came ont on Jniy 3
Having made this presentation. MI RAY
ngt at rug SusspJ,lO" 9 Pnd,,a VII, " soit
| the subject would he brought mp When
there was q witness on the stand who could
testify 10 the fncE
We propose. he said, 70 shew ihaa,