The Savannah morning news. (Savannah, Ga.) 1900-current, 1901-10-05
SCHLEY AND H0DGS0N.
Their Correspondence About Their
CollOquy Aboard the Brooklyn to
Be Introduced as Evidence.

Colloquy Aboard the Brooklyn to
Be Introduced as Evidence.
Washington, Oct. 4.-Copies of corre-
spondence between Lieut.. Hodgson
and Rear Admiral Schley during the
period from June 6, 1899. to Aug. 25,
1901, were given to the press to-day,
with the statement that the CORE
spondence will be submitted to the
Schley court of inquiry by Hodgson
while on the witness stand. Most of it
already has been published in the
newspapers, although a part of it has
not been made public heretofore. On
June 6, 1899, Admiral Schley wrote
Lieut.. Hodgson, enclosing an editorial
from the New York Sun, alleging that
a colloquy had occurred between
Schley and Hodgson on the bridge of
the Brokolyn during the battle of
Santiago, in the course of which the
admiral is represented to have said
Damn the Texas; let her lookout for
herself" in reply to Hodgson's remon
STRANGE against turning the ship to
starboard. Characterizing this as a
"grotesque lie" the admiral asked
Hodgson to write me your denial of
this oft-repeated calumny."
June Hodgson responded in a very
long letter, dated at the New York
Navy Yard, denying he authorized the
publication of any conversation and
making a long explanation of what he
says occurred during the battle. He
added that what was printed as a
part of a conversation between you
and me is substantially correct, though
not so as to the manner in which it
took place"
Under date of Washington. June 16,
1899, Admiral Schley wrote concerning
the alleged colloquy:
SchIcy Denies Col1oquy.
ct have no recollection whatever of
anything of the kind, and my memory
is exceedingly clear of the events of
that day, for had never felt in all my
life less excitement or more steadiness
of judgment than when the Dons came
out that day. When the turn was
made, the Brooklyn was, in my judg
ment, within the distance of their tao
tical diameter, and if it had been made
to port we should probably have passed
inside their line, but, having them ex-
posed to the uninterrupted fire of all
the ships, so important in the earlier
moments of the fight, the proper STRAIT
egg of a battle was to avoid interior
ing with that, and the sequel shows
that we made no mistake. Cook really
gave the order, which I approved, and
it is possible that your conversation
was with him. What I desire is simply
your denial that any such colloquy oc-
Cured"
Two letters came June II from the
navy yard in answer to this letter. In
one, very short, Hodgson says:
THE colloquy published in the New
York Sun, and alleged to have taken
place between you and me on the day
of the battle of Santiago, July 8, 1898,
never occurred"
The second letter gives Hodgson's
version of the colloquy.
Admiral Schley return thanks for the
denial furnished, adding, touching the
colloquy:
Your statement that 1t never occur
red Is absolutely true"
Next in the correspondence is a re-
pert from Capt Chadwick, including
IIcdgson's statement that he did not
intend to convey in his note of denial,
sent at the request of Admiral Schley,
the idea that no such colloquy took
place, and that all he sought was to
refute the allegation that controversy
existed at critical stage of the bat
tie.
The remainder of the correspondence
concerns Hodgson's efforts to obtain
copies of the correspondence while
Schley was on the South American
station. Copies were made on Admiral
Schley's return to this country and
filed with the navy department, Aug.
26, 1901.
W mn m N