The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1901-07-23
SOME ONE is A LIAR
ADMIRAL SAMPSON SPEAKS OUT
REGARDING THAT FAMOUS
BATTLE OFF SANTIAGO
HE DOESN'T SAY WHO IT IS
But the Inference Is Plain That His
Opinion of Admiral SchIeys
Veracity Is None of
the Best.

BOSTON, July 22,-Referring to Mac
lays naval history, which has been criti-
clsed by Secretary Long on account of
statements considered Objectionable, Rear
Admiral Sampson, in an interview pub
lished in the Transcript today, said:
In one way possibly, I was responsible
for the statement made in the history 1
was commander in chief of the squadron
and was responsible so far as reading
the proofs goes If the historian has
taken facts from my official reports to
the navy department, that is all we'll and
good. l stand by first reports and Of
fetal communications.
Il would welcome an investigation of
this whole matter by congress and by
the navy department" he said. ''but
see no hope of it's being taken up"
'Schley's statement regarding the battle
of Santiago" continued the admiral.
was moderately correct. Inc inter-
views given out some time afterwards
were not all correct. They were entirely
different from his, first accounts and
were written in a different spirit 1 think
An interview purporting to have come
from Admiral Schley, published, 1 be-
lleve on Jan. 6, was entirely incorrect.
Soon after this statement appeared in
print he came aboard my ship and told
me that he had been incorrectly quoted.
The reporter to whom the interview was
granted was a friend of mine, and he
afterwards told me that he had published
Schley's words practically as they had
been spoken"
STATEMENT BY WAINWRIGHT
WASHINGTON, July 22-Commander
Wainwright, commandant of the Unit
ed States naval academy, under date Of
July 20, has made the following reply to
the navy departments inquiry concerning
the use of Maclay's history:
Having seen so much in the papers In
regard to the third volume of Maclay S
naval history, and having received an
l think right to put you in possession Of
full knowledge of the case as existing
at the naval academy.
There has been no proposition to adopt
TINS third volume as a text book or ref
erence book, either from the head OF
department of English, of the academy
board, or of any person within my
knowledge. There is no intention here of
requiring the cadets to study his history
of such recent events as in the Spanish,
American war, and their time is too linn
tied to require them to study a full vol
ume on any one war
MaeIayS naval history was adopted
with the consent of the deDartment in
1895, when the English course here was
extended beyond its former limits.
This intention not to adopt the third
volume of Maclay's history is entirely
apart from any consideration of its value
as history of the war or of the knOwl-
edge of the facts and criticisms contained
therein. 1 dc not know of a copy of
third volume at the naval academy
LONG DISCREETLY SILENT.
Secretary Long this afternoon indicated
to the newspaper men who called upon
him that he did not care to discuss fur
ther the revival of the SIMPSONS Schley
controversy. He said, however, that he
had received a letter from Mr. Maclay
in which the author of the Naval His
tory of the United States agreed to his
Ghe secretary's) statement that only the
third chapter of his book-that relating
to- mobilization-had been placed in the
secretary's hands upon the publication
Of his book.