Evening star., 1901-09-24
VIGOROUS LEGAL SPARRING
ADMIRAL SCHLEY,S COUNSEL TELL
WHAT THEY INTEND TO PROVE.
The Judge Advocate of the Court of
Inquiry Objects to Comparisons
With Admiral Sampson's Course.

There was continuation of vigorous
sparring between counsel for Admiral
Schley and counsel for the Navy Depart
ment before the Schley court of inquiry
yesterday afternoon after The Stars re-
port of the proceedings was closed Com
mander Heilner, navigator on the Texas
before and during the battle of Santiago,
was again questioned, and Commander
Alex B. Bates, chief engineer on the same
battle ship, was on the stand
In reply to the assertion of Mr. Rayner
that Schley's acts would be compared with
those of Sampson to show that the block
ade the latter maintained off Santiago was
essentially the same as continued by Samp-
son, that his failure to further attack the
Colon in the harbor of Santiago was in
line with SIMPSONS policy after he was in
command and that the Brooklyn was in
the place assigned her before the battle,
the judge advocate said, in interposing an
objection
The Judge Advocates Objection.
IF the court please 1 object to this line
of argument. 1t does not make one par
ticle of difference what any one else did.
You might as we'll try to prove that some
body else committed a murder and say:
He committed it and my man is not to
blame 1t is simply waste of time. 1t
is nowhere within the scope of the precept
1t is endeavorng to go beyond the precept.
This is not inquiry between Admiral
Sampson and Admiral Schley. 1t is a ques-
ton between Admiral Schey and the
morale of the service, and these compari-
sons have absolutely no bearing upon it,
either in evidence or argument, and l OBJ
Ject to this ingenious attempt to extend
the scope of this precept."
Mr. Rayner-'This is an important point
with us, and we are prepared with the au-
thorities to maintain it. l not doing
this ingenuouSly, but very frankly. Not
withStanding the strenuous efforts of the
learned judge advocate to keep Admiral
Sampson out of this case, he can't keep him
out. l wish to be understood as not say
ing one word in derogation of Admiral
Sampson, nor to censure him, but to show
the court that what we did was under the
orders of Admiral Sampson, and that he
did precisely the same things we did. l
do not think addressing Judge Advocate
Lemly you have any right to interrupt me
in an argument
The judge advocate-'I want to say here
then, that as an officer of this court, when
l think there is an improper argument 1
deem 1t my duty at any time to interrupt,
and the court must rule upon the fact as
to whether l am right not"
MIR. Rayner-"1 have not concluded. The
court cannot decide until l have concluded.
we propose prove tnat when Admiral
Schley withdrew from the reconnaissance
against the Colon and did not come in con-
tact with the shore batteries, he did it un-
der a general regulation of the navy which
required it of him, and that Admiral Sdlnp-
son passed by the Colon at thirty minutes
after o'clock on June /, and saw her
lying there, and never pretended to attack.
Do you mean that we have not any right
to justify our conduct and our actions by
the conduct and actions Of the commander
in-chief?
You will find you can't keep Sampson
out Of this. You cannot keep him con-
structively from the presence Of this court
You may actually, but not constructively.
1t Is impossible
Mr.. Rayner added that they further
wanted to prove that on the morning OF
the Sd of July the Brooklyn had her pro proper r
station in that blockade line, under the
orders of Admiral Sampson. He did not
know as these matters could be proved by
this witness.
Mr.. Rayner further said:
Il will say to the court that If we are to
be excluded now we are to be excluded in
all our testimony. If Admiral Schley comes
on the stand and we ask the question, Were
you on your station on July 81 and he
says, I was there because Admiral Samp-
son put me there are we to. be prevented
from asking that question because We are
putting Admiral Sampson into the con-
troversy?"
Judge That did not say"
MIR. Wilson's Argument.
After some further sparring Mr.. Rayner
withdrew the question, saying that Mr..
Wilson wanted to argue it before the court
and did not wish to take 1t up at this time
Mr.. Wilson said:
THE reason I do not care to argue this
case now is because I regard it as one Of
exceeding Importance. and 1 do not think
we ought to precipitate this argument un-
til have fully considered it and until some
court must pass upon the whole question.
I may just as well indicate here first as
last what I regard to be some Of the i'm
portant features Of this case. OF course
and propose to show beyond all question,
that Admiral Sampson from first to last
was not in this fight at all, and therefore
Admiral Schley had thrust upon him the
responsibility Of this battle, but I am not
going to argue 1t now. So I venture to
suggest that when come to a witness
that knows something about these things
and we ask him question that will de
court then deem proper. that will be the
best time to argue 1t, and If 1t suits ine
convenience of the court and my friends
on the other side and my associates,
prefer to take it up them
The judge advocate-'"That is perfectly
satisfactory"
MIR. Hanna Replies.
Mr.. Hanna replied briefly to Mr. Rayner,
saying:
1T is an impossibility to leave the record
in this condition without a word further
The suggestion made is that Admiral Samp-
sons blockade be taken as standard as
a model as a type of perfect blockade, and
If Schleys blockade comes up to that
standard 1t Is to be accepted as satisfac-
tory. We object to taking any imperfect
blockade.
''One further word in regard to the sug-
gestion just made to the intention to
show that Admiral Sampson was not in this
battle. I wish to say we do not understand
that the question whether Admiral Samp-
son was or was not In the battle of Santi-
ago Is before the court. II 1t Is, we shall
be happy to investigate It. We are here to
find out all the facts. but we do not care
to roam around into outside matters, but
II that question is led up to in any legiti-
mate way, or II any line which this inquiry
institutes will lead to Admiral Sampson.
and properly and legitimately bring him
before this court. we shall offer no objec-
tion to the prosecution Of such an inquiry.
Until the case takes that attitude 1t is i'm
proper to introduce into the examination
questions which proceed upon the theory
that he Is in the case. II the counsel can
bring him into the case fairly, squarely and