The Madison daily leader. [volume] (Madison, S.D.) 1890-current, 1901-10-29


er-in-chief shall, II possible, before go
ing into action. supply every captain
with plan OF battle, showing thereon
the position each shall occupy.
Yes replied witness. in reply to
Captain Lemly's question if he had
complied with the article. Il do not
understand that that is necessarily
written. | think that the order is suf-
ficiently carried out when com
manderinchief decides to place his
crews in the form of battle and in
forms each what he proposes to do"
DO you think. admiral. that you can
supply every captain with plan OF
battle and do that at an oral confer
ence9' asked Captain Lemly
Il do not think that is absolutely
necessary" witness replied There
are instances whore battles have been
fought without doing that Any plan
of battle that might be originated is
subject TO change. have never known
battle that was ever fought on a plan
originally chosen"
Mr. Rayner-"Do any Of the regula-
tions use the word written"
Captain Lemly-"Do you think you
could supply the captains with plan
Of battle without writing Them"
Mr. Rayner-"I could not, but
know tie admiral could"
Gave Verbal Instructions.
The Judge advocate then asked wit
ness whether between the dates to
which the court has restricted the ex-
animation. he had. according TO arti
fles II of the regulations. furnished
"a h captain with plan Of battle.
Verbally. yes
But not in writing?'
Il did not think the regulations re.
lured IT,
Did YOU communicate TO Your cap
'ains Your confidential instructions
rom Admiral Sampson not TO expose
vour ships TO land batteries before the
destruction of the Spanish feet?'
Il did not because regarded them
as confidential"
The Judge advocate called the ad-
| miral's attention to his statement to
the senate that while on the bridge OF
the Brooklyn on the afternoon OF May
| 81. but then about - miles from Glen
| faegos. he heard big guns fired with
| the regularity of a salute. The ad-
mral stated that he remembered the
incident distinctly He did not know
| The exact distance. He did not con.
| sui, the log.
Does not the log show that you
We're miles from the harbor9"
Il do not know The admiral then
proceeded to explain that the COM
munication sent 10 the senate was got
ten up hurriedly and he may have
| all. sav,a ciiph. Mistakes
Captain Lemly asked witness to
look al the signal book Of the Brook
| lyn for May 80 and 10 read a signal
which had been made at So a. m. by
| the Texas 10 the flagship. This he did,
Manner Of the Blockade.
! (Which was the closer blockade. at
| Cienfuegos or Santiagoo'
| Il think al Cienfuegos There We
We're from three TO four miles of: al
| Santiago We We're from three and a
| half 10 FIVE and a half miles: closer at
| both places at night.
Il do not mean distance. | mean
| closeness"
| AT Santiago il was closer on ae-
| count Of the method used"
AT Cionfuegos did You issue any
| plan OF battle in case the Spanish fleet
| should attempt 10 enter or come out
| No. | should have relie>t on signal.
| You stated in one Of your reports
| that while lying of CienfueSos you
| feigned disorder in the squadron in the
| hope that the Spanish feet Would
come ont. Did you inform the captains
| of the squadron of this ruse9
NO. think not talked with some
A. -fx.y, hA,f
it."
Did You mention it to Captain
| Cook"
| Il do not remember. talked with
| him so frequently on every subject
| that | cannot recall now whether |
| mentioned this or not.
| You would have arrived at Cienfue-
! Cos May u If you had not been delay
! ed several days on the way?
! The delays only made a difference
| Of few hours.
| When did il first occur to you there
| had been firing at Cienfuegos?
| When il occurred.
when did you mention it to 9th
ers9"
| AT the time"
Did YOU signal to the fleet about
it,"
| Il think So"
| Witness was then closely questioned
about the time Of the receipt or the
Dear Schley" letter. which the ad-
| miral declared was received May -
| according to his best recollection.
Signals OF cienfuesos.
| .udge Advocate Lemly then called
the attention OF the witness to his
| statement that when he saw the sig
nails at Cienfuegos he did not under
! stand them and asked why he made
| the statement.
| Because Admiral Sampson had
stated to me unQualifiedly that as soon
as he got the situation better in han
he would advise me-
| "When did the Iowa arrive at Glen
| fuegos?"
The Iowa arrived at Cienfuegos on
the 2od. some time in the afternoon
think"
Captain I.emly then stated that the
Iowa left Key West at IL o'clock on
May 90 and gained in her trip about 81
! -, thn ernoivnu Aa asked VIII