The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-09-28
TESTIMONY OF THE DAY.
wood and Hood on the Stand-McCal-
In's Plain Statements.

WASHINGTON, Sept. 2.-As usual Ad-
miraI Dewey lost no time to-day in bring
ing the Schley court Of inquiry TO order,
and as usual counsel on both sides of the
case were in their seats and prepared TO
proceed promptly with the business before
the court.
To-day's session begun with the call of
Captain Wise TO make verbal changes in
the official copy of his testimony. He al
tered his previous statement concerning
the order of the Navy Department of May
% 1855 i'm which he was directed TO in
form every vessel off Santiago that the
flying squadron is off Cienfuegos,' saying
that he desired to correct his response to
the courts question as to why this order
was not carried out by stating that it had
been carried out. The flying squadron
was ordered TO proceed with all possible
dispatch, he said. and added, Il did not
desire TO inform the commodore of the
flying squadron of his own movements.
The order was to inform commanders of
the movements of the flying squadron"
Lieut. Spencer s. Wood who commanded
the dispatch boat Dupont during the Span
ish war, was then called and continued
his testimony. begun yesterday. Mr.. Ray
nor continued his cross-examination. The
WltneSS Sdlu tndl Nfnle al OlenIueSOS lie
had been on picket duty two miles from
shore on the night of May %. and had been
instructed to signal the squadron with two
red lights i'm case the enemys torpedo
boats came out of the harbor.
hIr. RaynOr then read from the testi-
mony Of Captain Harber then of the
Texas, saying there had been no picket
vessels within the line of the fleet off Glen
he vii said ba STA anf
was wrong.
Captain Lemly said Captain Harber had
testified that there were no pickets $50 far
as he could recall" TO which Mr. Raynor
responded:
We are not impeaching Captain Har-
ber's veraeity. We are impeaching his
recollection. not his integrity"
Mr.. Raynor-Captain Harber has stated
that there were no picket boats at Glen
fuegos. He was wrong. was he not?
He was" replied the witness LAS 1
have seen since, the commander-in-chief
also reported that the Dupont was not
there. have written the department that
was there. Other people forgot about it.
too"
MIR. WOOD INSISTS.
"Tou are trying TO justify Captain
Hsrbers want of recollection by stating
that the cOmmander-in-chiefw wrote a letter
that there was no picket boats there"
He did not mention their presence. and
l corrected it. / wish to bring il out that
the Dupont was inside the line. and that is
the report that 1 made 10 the department
/ still stand on the point that he is not
bringing out where the torpedo boat was
Mr.. RaynOr again attempted 10 confuse
the witness, but Lieutenant Wood insisted
or the correctness OF his statement. Can
tain I.emley again objected 10 Mr.. Raw
nOr's implied Impeachment OF the witness
Mr.. Hanna asked what steps had been
taken while the flying squadron was of
CienfuegOs 10 ascertain IL the Spanish fleet
inside the harbor there.
None that know OF. the response.
Was there any effort 10 destroy the
shore batteries there?
The witrtess replied that ne knew OF none
lie said. replying 20 another question bv
Mr.. RaynOr that vessels I'm the inside har-
Dor could not have been discerned from
the outside. Lieutenant Wood was then
dismissed
Lieutenant John Hood. who during the
war commanded the Hawk. was the next
witness. He said that on May q ne had
delivered dispatches from Admiral Sampson
70 Admiral Schley when the latter was OF
tlenfuegos He related that ne had been
called aboard the New York admiral
SampsOn's nagshipD on Nav T when the
ofncers OH board were preparing dispatches
lie spoke OF the presence Of Admiral Samp-
son MI Raynor objected TO the fntroduc-
non OF conversation or verbal orders say
lns the orders would speak for themselves
aht must necessarily supersede any verbal
INSTRUCTIONS. The question was argued al
some length by Mr.. Raynor and Captain