The Montgomery tribune. (Montgomery City, Mo.) 1892-1910, 1901-12-27
SIMPSONS OBJECTIONS.
Counsel for Rear Admiral Sampson
File Objections to Admiral
Dewey's Report.
WANT CERTAIN PARTS STRICKEN OUT.


sDtts Sis-lhc oDltttiDn
of Admiral w. 4. Sampson to that
portion of Admiral Dcwey's report Of
h Schlcy court of inquiry In which
he says Admiral Schlcy wns In com
mand at the battle OF Santiago and
entitled TO the credit for the victory,
was fled with Secretary Long Friday.
The document was brought TO the
navy department by MIR. u. =. Theall,
of counsel for Admiral sampson; aud
handed to the secretary. IL In as fol-
lows.
No. % Broad Street. New York..
Sir. As counsel for Rear. Admiranii' ssmp.
the department, for reasons below stat
ed, strike out or .rpecincnhy disnpprove
aha, portion Of Admi,sl pewey,s or,nlon
q the schley court OF Inquiry, IN which
he. states his view TO be that commodore
naval battle on Santiago.
L-commodorc schiey was not In com
mand a. mat battle. A.. ,,.,., a,.,..
and the navy department had decided That
Admiral sampaon. was In command at
That battle, and Commodore schicy. sec
uI.-The question a. to who command
ed at Santiago wnn not referred 60 ihc
bearing on the point was excluded.
I,-cUmmodoIc bchlcy was not IN com
'1xJ-The dinposltion OF tho forces at tho
bcginnlng q me attic a,e9rdlnn TO Nom.
modore sshl.y'n own statement places
The brooklyn and the. Vixen were the
wcstcrnmoat ships OF the fleet; the ln-
most, The New York was nearer both Of
the latter than was the br9oklyn, anI
totally a, the time when ne ind,ena Tss ss
action. and when the Gloucester waa en-
gagged with the Euror aud pluton. Com
u,asr s,h,ey .n!H. .!..'. 'H wnSs ci ana Y" nS
your nagShip' than to tho brooklyn. We
have, ,n,n; me Sas,nn othhaa n,.t ~ q ld rr ~.
chief within signal distance aud closer to
q large number ~ the ships than w the
commAnder-ln.chirf could not. have
reached the most distant weasel ny hls
i,satod by an intrrmcdintc vcrscl-an on-
iircly usual coursr-but II II equally true
that the second In command could not
fcct fnnmoiy the Indiana aud the Glou- |
ccgtcr) without likewise repeating sig
In his state ~ anairH. the regulations
of the navy and me customs OF Tue sea
place the absolute. command ani the re-
"'di-Tho prooklyn'a mncuvcr during
the action destroys any cInim that Com |
modorc schlcy might have bad To the
command. The facts nH To the loop are
found by the court, The finding and opln-
ship he Unanswered without wnrninE 10 |
the rest Of the squadron. and In disregard
o. u.@rI III rm1iisipEST OF THE uSIT-
irnSNMrANiNTs MAJ PES yIHpar h TGldlAMr !
MSSB6ppRGE' stciiiiff.hY sEcoSbe * CON-.
This irc, was before tho court Tor the
eacrctury's letter To the .sennie dated
February eh' lSsp states lha, 'hs sgns nm,
under his tSampson'-l command. .nnd
thc advancement OF commodor. Sehlcy |
icrS as noxt In rank at tho victory OF
cbM@TENsESr 9BurTsqTl9sNS M TO WIG
NOT WEFEiiRED 10 TllE COURT FOR
coNslnGltATloN. ,EXipENSE hEAit-
N)-if Commodore schloy was In conl. |
mnnd. Admiral Sampson was not, and VI
mand was 10 be considered by the court. |
surely Admiral Sampson became mn In
tnr,s,ed parry, nnd under ne prcc'pt was
cdly refused him.
m)-Tho ianWuagc Of the prcccpt os-
ed At that battle. ID directs tho court To
inquire into the CONDUCT of Admiral
sSsnlIyyn Ss nn ,9'e 10 S Mas S y , az Z" oh,SG
Ca. report tts conclusions upon his CON
DUCT ~ connection with the events OF
",rt .i,hn V,dir,nI "nttucor. N, ,ho ,o,.,
mnintnined Inn, ,his Wmaii,r" ,yas nuu,psupiee
H. sranr al, IN, innui,w 'rheww u"rms'oun
w~Illinen"ns 10 60 lntos A N 'their yi"w
r,nuudf - 80. ~. na"n s'.A
,snms ""n ~ Sm",e,rc, ~ ~, cw"..rr,, y rs'ny
prnass,,, To- "SS''''"' W w" '"usu ""'
Zone further word ma to n nnercr,,on
Just made ns To the Intention 10 ahow |
battle. / wish To- aay ihat we do not I'M
sicrsland that the question whether Nd-
mlrnt AulnnEnn kunH ne kNnu mt Ia tha
battle OF Ean,iaro IL before the court.
III 1T 10 WE. SHALL Ms uArPY 10
case takes that attitude II Is impropcr 10
snr.ad upon ihr record nrrt,nrnis nnd
.oop,'es,,onss wwh,ch proee"i nnnn nv ,bc INV
Thai he " In tho cnsetf Counsel for III, |
appiIcnnt Withdrew The oucsiion :" Wv
Al pngo igO ~ fhc rcaoni' liz snme mat. |
aer being under disolsalun, MIR. Hannn |
Snld; " ~
iif II IL the dnniro NJ the court 10 no
inio these things. II would, OF course. Z,
proper that WE shonid Also 10 into them. |
IL would not only ne proper, nuT IN
WOULD Bli NECESSARY. $500 We