Semi-weekly Windham County reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1897-1901, 1901-10-04

COMING SUnLEY'S WAY
VERY STRONGLY.
HIS LINE OF DEFENSE
DEVELOPED BY ONE WITNESS

| tEkl SIhUNULls
HIS LINE OF DEFENSE
! DEVELOPED BY ONE WITNESS
show. He Did Command at Santiago
Explains Delay at Cienfasgos-Prossc".
,,ou,s Witnesses Nearly All Make Fatal
| Adn,issIOns-Es Especially on Coan"E
ou.sriou-The Case Against Him Fair
Iy Demolished Already.
Tuesday the evidence piled up either OF q
concerted effort or the most extraordinary
confederation Of errors ever known 10 keep
important information away from Schley.
| CAPTAIN Sigsbee, the hero Of the Maine, was
The star witness and though he appeared to be
very fair. his evidence bore strongly against
| SchIey, and even squarely contradlcted nun
on one point, whether he expressed disDe.
lief that Cervera was at santiago; Dut on
cross examination it developed the old thing
that the departments despatch saying posi-
lively that Cervera was there was never COM
inundated to Schley and it supported Schley
on the issue whether he could have coaled the
last day before he started, May 70, Tor Key
West.
Schley at the time gave as one Of the rea-
sons for this movement 81 was assured by
Sigsbee that the Spanish fleet was not at San
tiago."
II never said that" declared Capt Sigsbee.
I"What said was that had not seen them
although had been scouting of there for
week" On the contrary, he said he did be.
lieve it and had so informed Schey. What
I said was that had not seen 1t. had
nothing but the dispatches of the department
as to whereabouts OF the Spanish ships
IL appeared on cross examination that ne had
received two messages from the department.
one MAY 10 saying Cervera was reported
there aud another May 90 saying he was
There, and il was shown that 1t must have
been the former of which he told Schlev ana
his despatch to Schley of even two days later,
May % said mo news here. have seen moth
ing OF the Spanish fleet" Schley,s report on
the matter also stated that Jewell and wise
had reported to him that they had seen moth
ing of the Spanish fleet Both contradict him
TO The extent OF saving that they did not eX-
pres their belief that Cervera was not there :
but not one OF the three would swear that
they ever told him they believed he was there
and all three admitted that they never com,
municated their information that he was and
that thev never delivered the message TO him.
Sig-bee testified further:
II NAV have stated that | knew nothing
, positively or absolutely about It's movements
but recited certain events to show that there
was probability of the fleet being in Santa
20 at that time
Mr. Hanna-'The portion OF the question TO
which / should like TO have you give an explicit
, answer il whether you assured Commodore
Schley that YOU believed the Spanish heet was
not In Santiago:
~ did not say that Il believed II was not
there 1 said had not seen 1t.
did he ask you II you believed the span
,sb fleet was In the harbor at Sanliago:'
Il don't remember his putting question
In such terms"
Ibid YOU make any effort to ascertain II
the Spanish squadron was at Santiago prior
to May 2Sy'
only by extreme watchfulness, that is all.
, The whole point seems to hinge on diner
ence OF recollection as to what was said, very
! liable to result from after knowledge. lht
important fact is that information TO which
the commander was entitled was someho"
withheld BY three different men at san
t tiago just as 1t had been al Clehluegos
FL Admiral Evans was closely examined abou
the Cierfuegos slip and it appeared that Schle.
] was about the only commander who dld no. '
know that the signals had been arranged WIZ
the Cubans. Evans admitted that his ship laic
by Schley's two days, that he saw the iignt'
, ashore and knew they meant that the CuDah'
were signalling but never mentioned IL u
D Scbley. The reason was he never dreamed
= that Schley had not been put In possession o
the code and took It for granted that boats wer'
{ being sent ashore TO get the information; ,
t Evans began by criticism OF Schley, WHEN
on cross examination, however, he recahe'
or modified Mr. Rayncr OF Schey's counse
: TO positiye assertions, either because ne ms
understood questions or desired TO change III
answers.
n Evans book "a Sailors Log" was quote,
by counsel for Schley. and during the eros
9 examination the Admiral had to do con slider
! able shifting TO reconcile statements III NJ
book and his direct testimony.
+, Sigshee's cross examination was also hell
I TO Srhley on the question whether he mlgb
have coaled off Santiago in the two or three
days before he started for santiago an issu'
( on which the testimony has been plled hlgl
against Schev nearly all the commanders baN
ing sworn that there would have been no dif
+ fcultv. But Sigsbee like Evans admitted tina
: the weather was too rough, SO that 1t would
have been very difficult. Those VINO cam'
e down to exact dates generally admitted tha
the oath and 18th were too rough, but SAID
as Sgsbee does. that IT was growing Gamer
5 on the 26th On that day the captain OF tht
= Collier testiies his machinery broke dowf
so he couldn't control his ship and it woule
u have been very dangerous for war ship tt
= come along side. 1t was that night that
:, Schley started for Key West.
So as the case appears now from inc pros
t ecution's own evidence all that remains OF
o II against Schley is that retrograde move
Z ment vet unexplained aud his change o.
g mind and turning back after he had gone
n part way to Key West.
. Evans and New York Sun correspondent
q testified testified about the famous loop,
T. and that at the critical point the Brooklyn
was not over 100 yards or quarter of
mile from collision with the Texas poin
d that Is probably of no importance as Secre
tary Long has himself said that Schley wa
not responsible for the loop.
= Wednesday Admiral Dewey and the court
= made the first ruling that bears unfairly
O against Schley. II was over question wher
n the circular form of blockade first commenced
= and the Judge advocate objected on TIN
- ground that it brought SIMPSONS acts int
the case for purposes of comparison; Int
ruling was The court decides that all ques
itons relating to the blockade Of Santiago
must be confined to the time prior to the ar
s rival of the comman ler-n.chicf." The cour
J. holds that whatever SIMPSONS conduct was
d il cannot be used either as a justification
q or charge against Schley. But 10 IN
y Law mind il seems perfectly clear that there i