Willmar tribune. [volume] (Willmar, Minn.) 1895-1931, 1901-11-06

touched many POINTS OF lnes campaign ;Of
the flying squadron, but mainly centered
about the difficulties encountered in coal
| ing and the reasons for the retrograde
movement Not ore OF them related to the
battle of Santiago. ~ -.
The judge advocates cross-examinati ton
Wednesday covered the retrograde move
| ment, the reconnaissance of May 81, the
loop of the Brooklyn and the alleged COL
loQuy with Lieut. .HodgsOn about the Texas
The cross-exa mination Of Admiral Schley
! on the battle of Santiago began with a
question as to what the first movement of
| the Brooklyn's heln1wa after the enemy's
ships were sighted coming out.
I'VE We're heading west by NORTH" he
| replied. 1.-The first helm was to port"
Capt. Cook gave the order for the
turn?"
"Yes.''
"You regard that turn as very impor-
tant, do YOU not?'
II think it was the movement that Ge-
cided the events of that day.
The admiral said in response to oues
tons that he had not mentioned the loop
in his report of the battle. 1t was an in
cident of the battle which he had no IDEA
ever would come into controversy. Capt
Cook had given the order without orders
from him, except under his general instruc-
tions to close in and keep somewhere about
1000 yards away, outside Of the broadside
torpedo range. When the time came for
the turn Capt. Cooks conception of the
movement coincided with his own. AL
though Capt. Cook gave the order, he
would have done so in a moment had the
captain of the Brooklyn failed to do So
DO you assume full responsibility for
the turn?'
absolutely. If did rot give the order
I approved it," replied the admiral.
Admiral Schley, in RESPONSIBLE a question,
said he never heard of the Texas incident
until six months after the battle. He had
been under the impression until later that
the starboard engine Of the Brooklyn was
backed to facilitate the turn He recol-
lected distinctly that he warned Cant
Cook as the enemy approached that they
were going to ram him. He vas CLOSELY
questioned as to the order which went be-
! low Ito stand by to ram" In answer tn
question he said he supposed the captain
Fad given the order. He was not certain.
docs your letetr to the senate, dated
February 1S, 1899. plead the precautionary
| order OF the department for not destroying
| the Colon:''
Il should rather think that is tho in.
ference
The admiral then at the request Of the
judge advocate read what he wrote to the
| senate. The letter contained the precau-
/ tionary order of the department at the
opening of the war. He again explained as
he had done before that when he wrote
his communication to the senate he did
not have all the records before him. He
omitted to mention in that communica-
ton. he said, Admiral SIMPSONS caution
at Key West. He had prepared it largely
| from memory. In further support of his
position the admiral read the department.
instruction of July 10, specifically warning
the commander in chief against riskine
armored vessels to the fire of land bat
teries. He was cross-questoned closely
| as to all the orders hea ring h.
Ject He said he had never seen until he
saw them in the report the orders of April
3 and - modifying to some extent the orig
| inal order. But he had been advised OF
their purport.
! The instruction was to go in to 7,OOt
yards. and he thought until several days
afterWard that the ships had gone in lc
that distance. II directed the ships tc
| follow the flag, to operate against the
| Colon and fire al the forts to develop them
and think the reconnaissance, so far as
it went, was eminently successful. The
| batteries were developed, and the fact was
demonstrated that the enemy was in port
With squadron of only five or six ships
believe that only the strongest military
| necessity would have justified me in risk
! ing the loss of a vessel that might have
| reduced our squadron to numerical in.
feriority with the enemy. If one or two
of our ships had been crippled, the enemy
| I1llSHC nave come Ous ana engaged us VIII
disastrous results"
Capt. LemIy at this point passed to the
battle of July 3. stopping to ask one or two
incidental questions about the circum
stances of the evening of July 2.
Now" said Capt. Lemly, "there appear
to be three reasons why you made the turn
Why did you make that turn?"
LAS I already stated IN my direct tes
timony, there is another very much more
important reason which you have MOI
| asked, and that was that the ship might con
tinue in the action and beat the enemy
as we did. That was the controlling one
| of all
One of the most interesting features o.
the day was the development of the fac
that the report of the battle written by Ad
mira! Schley July g. 1898, was not the orig
inal report. The original report never ha:
been published. and in accordance with {
previous decision the court declined it tt
go into the record. Admiral Schley was
allowed to explain, however, that Admira
Sampson declined to receive the first re-
port because it did not mention the pres
ence of the New York. II felt that thu
victory at that time,'' said Admiral Schley
in explaining the matter, twas big enough
for all, and made this change out of gen
crosby and because knew if the New
York had been present she would have
done as good work as anybody else.''