The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1901-08-08
TWAS SCHLEY'S VICTORY
Says One Who Stood on the Deck of the
Brooklyn and Saw the Fight.

In connection with the controversy
over Admiral Schleys actions during
the naval battle off Santiago. opened
afresh by the charges of cOwardice
made by Maclay, author of the Naval
Academy text book, and the conse-
| quent demand of Admiral Schley for
court of inquiry to investigate his
conduct of the Santiago naval con-
flict, the Cincinnati Enquirer asked
George E. Graham to furnish an I'M
biased account of the battle. During
the Santiago naval campaign Mr.
Graham was correspondent of the
Associated Press, noted for its impair
TALLY and faithfulness in giving the
facts. When Admiral Sampson, on
the New York, left the squadron Mr.
| Graham fastened to the Brooklyn.
Dr"ing the battle he stood on the
bridge beside Captain Cook and Ad-
miral Schley, and was the only civil
ian spectator to witness every move
ment and know every order issued by
| the admiral. His account of the bat
tie and the preceding and consequent
events sent the Associated Press were
widely distributed at the time and
were not questioned. Mr.. Grahams
version is as follows:
1T has been and is still hard for me
to believe that Historian Maclay
wrote his attack upon Rear Admiral
Schley except by instigation and at
the urging of the navy department
clique. He is in close touch with
those who have provided the press
and the civilian head of the depart
ment with the material that has been
| intended, dire failure as it has been,
to change the public view of Admiral
Schley's character as an officer and
man.
AT least Maclay is honest in one
thing. He has dared to do openly
what these sneaks of the naval clique
have not had the moral courage to
do. When has Captain Chadwick,
SIMPSONS flag officer, dared to as
sert that Schley was coward When
has he dared to do otherwise than
convey the material to a New York
journal for publication Did Robley
Evans, he of the fighting cognomen,
first person the autobiography he
wrote? Did Sigsbee dare to do it ex-
cept to stultify himself by denying
conditions which he had previously
detailed in his reports to the depart
ment?
Maclay, it is asserted, wrote his crit
icism from naval reports. What naval
reports The expurgated things that
have been foisted upon the public, or
the real reports of commanding Of
ticersf have in my possession the
report of the battle of Santiago writ
ten by two officers of the converted
yacht called the Vixen. 1t is signed
by Lieutenant Alexander Sharpe and
it was his account of the fight as he
saw it at short range, the only naval
eyewitness not engaged in fighting.
| placed it alongside the navy depart
ment's book purporting to print it,
and find it has been expurgated so
as to give but little credit to the
Brooklyn, and so as not to disclose
the real position of SIMPSONS ship,
the New York. Is that the way his
tory is made, and is Maclay to be
blessed for boldly following the ex-
ample set him? Let me be as bold as
Maclay. If coward is to be the word
let us draw the line sharply. have
supreme confidence in our navy. l
don't believe a coward would stay in
it year. There are none in it now.
There are men with unearned fight
ing sobriquets. There was one with
us. His name was Evans. His ship
was never closer to the enemy than
one mile. 1t was not hit, but Flight
ing Bob crawled into the coming
tower and watched the fight from a
six-inch by one-inch slit.
''Schley was on the deck of the
Brooklyn, Captain Cook was near A
mans life blood splashed their clothes.
The ship quivered under fire. Still
they stood there. Captain Clark, on
the Oregon, was on his bridge. Cap
tain Phillips, of the Texas, stayed on
his bridge until part of it was shot
away. And when it was over Evans
had the largest story to tell, story
he would not like to see now because
of its great inaccuracy. And pray
who was the coward?
1.-THE history of the battle of San
tiago told exactly as it occurred, it
seems to me, is an absolute condem-
nation of Admiral SIMPSONS Wanted
ability and tribute to Schley and
his officers. The happenings of the "a
hours preceding the battle will go far,
think, to demonstrate that Samp-
son was reprehensible for deliberately
weakening the line of battle and de-
sorting the line himself when he knew
that for the first time in several
weeks, or since the establishment Of