Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1901-11-04
At ORA|OR|CAL STAGE
Arguments in the Schley Court
Of Inquiry Begun This
Afternoon.
.wo Newspaper Men Called by
Schley Not Allowed to
Testify.
Sissbee Recalled and Question.
ed as to Statements to
Press Boat.

Washington. Nov. 4-Two new wit
nesses were before the Schley court of
Inquiry today, both of them called in the
interest Of Schley. They We're Frank Is.
Richards and George Lynch, newspaper
correspondents. Richards was on the
press boat Premier, and was called TO
testify concerning the Interview with
Eigsbee off Santiago in May, 1885, Lynch
was on the Somers n. Smith and was
called to relate his recollection of Sigs-
bees communication to that boat, con-
cerning wrich Photographer Hare and
CORRESPONDENT Scovil already have testi-
fed. The first witness to take the stand
TODAY was Sigsbee, recalled for the pur-
rose of reviewing his former testimony.
Schley was also called for this purpose.
and his statement occupied a goodly
portion of the time of the court. There
were innumerable verbal changes made
as well as some additions to his former
testimony.
During the day Lemiy submitted for
consideration of the court large mass
OF documentary evidence. including the
reports OF the commanding officers of
the battle on July 8; Schiey's letter to
the senate, one of Sigsbee's letters. also
the letter of the secretary of the navy to
the senate as printed in The executive
document. There has been no change IN
the program arranged on Friday for the
presentation of argument by counsel.
Hanna is expected to begin his presen-
taticn of the case during the afternoon
sitting.
While Sigsbee was on the stand Kay
ner asked him if he had megaphoned or
otherwise communicated to the press
boat Premier, while off Santiago. the
fact that the Spanish fleet was not in
Santiago. Witness replied he had not
done SO, altho he would have been JUS
titled in saying so IL he had thought u
proper under the circumstances OF war.
When Sigsbee was excused Lemly an
nounced he had no more witnesses to
call.
Frank b. Richards was then sworn.
Richards stated he was on the dispatch
boat Premier during the Santiago CAM
paign and the boat was hailed by Sigs-
bee on the night of May q or 2S AT
this point Lemly objected to this line OF
evidence on the ground that Schley was
not present during the conversations;
that 1t was not material to the issue.
Rayner contended that this alleged con-
yersation with Sigsbee was one of vital
Importance to the case: he did not desire
to impeach the credibility of Sigsbee,
hut will endeavor to impeach very
strongly his recollection. The court de-
cided the testimony was immateriai and
pnder the ruling neither Richards nor
lynch could testify. Schley then took
the stand for the purpose OF correcting
his testimony.
The admiral was suffering from cold
and his voice was quite hoarse. He be-
gan corrections of his testimony. Most
of these corrections are of typographi-
cal errors. or changing words to make
the sentences read more smoothly
Referring to the order from Sampson
dated at Key West, May 19, instructing
the commander of the flying squadron
to establish blockade of Cienfuegos
with the least possible delay. witness
read sentence from 1t az follows:
"After / have the situation more IN
hand l will write you to give you any
more information as suggests itself.
..The word more should be omitted,
eaid Schley, "and the sentence read as
follows: After have the situation in
hand. I vii write you and give any In
formation that suggests itself.
In referring to the testimony regard
Ing the arrival CT othe Harvard on the
27th with dispatch from the secretary
OF the navy informing him that All
the departments information Indicated
the presence of the Spanish squadron at
Santiago which dispatch he had de-
clared had never reached him and,
therefore, he had never seen it or heard
of II until recently. Schley corrected
this portion of his testimony by stating
that neither his flag lieutenant nor his
secretary had ever seen the dispatch,
nor remembered it. He had previously
included his first lieutenant in this
statement. Referring to the testimony
regarding the reconnaissance of May 81,
the admiral changed his statement that
fifty. If not more, shells passed oveI
the feet to read: "A number of shells
M sesd over the fleet He also changed
his evidence concerning suspicious
in the harbor of Santiago.
July @ TO read: Before dark l noticed
in the harbor a good deal of smoke
coming up The ofNcial record made
him say he cav the smoke after dark
Coming to the answer to the question
in reference to mis- order sent below DUR
the early part of the battle to stand by
te. RAM" Schley emphasized his former
testimony by stating that there was
distinct attempt to ram on the part of
the Maria Teresa, Cervera's flagship,
and the Viscaya." He also reiterated his
confidence in the Brooklyn's speed by
stating that with one engine and ali
the boiler power" she could have gotten
up all the speed that was needed AS
10 the passing of the flying squadron by
the Eagle on the morning of May 10 and
the latter's conveying information that
there was mo news" Schley corrected
his. testimony. adhering, he said. that he
was not mistaken as to this, by stating
he might be mistaken. Schley also cor
rected his statement regarding the visit
to the flagship New York. when he had
made a preliminary report of the battle
OF July 3 to Sampson. The record, he
said. did not make the matter quite
clear "The admiral said to me" con-
tinued the witness, that / had omitted a
very important detail, which was to