The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1901-09-13

rTO11Id
introduced TO substantiate Mr.. Frost's
testimony as 10 Admiral Howison's- at
titu6e toward Admiral Schlev and
much interest was manifested when the
next witness, William Z. Spon. of the
firm OF Spon & Chamberlain, book SELL
ers, and publishers in New York and
London, made his appearance Mr.
SpOn testified that he had been a pas-
senger on the steamer Minneapolis.
which sailed from London for New
York on the 18th of October. 1900. and
that Admiral Howison had also been a.
passenger on this vessel.
The witness related that one day
during the voyage, the Sampson Cchley
controversy came up and one gentle
man expressed himself as favorable to
Admiral Sampson. Mr.. Spon had taken
the opposite side and in his effort to
show that Admiral Sampson was not a
Mt man for that position had remarked
that the admiral had been the last
member of the boar dof ordnance to
agree TO the use of smokeless powder
by the navy. Continuing. Mr. Spon
said that Admiral Hovison came with
in hearing of the controversy at this
point, and walking up to the group
said:
Howison Defends Sampson.
Il correct you; this is not so. xou
men do not know what you are talking
about You do not know anything
about it. Sampson is very much re-
speed and looked up to. and especially
by the younger men of the navy"
Continuing, the witness said that
some cOlloquy had followed. after which
Admiral Howison had said:
Anyhow, Schley should have been
courtmartiaIed He was the main
cause Of all this controversy in the
newspapers"
Mr.. Spon added that. Admiral Howl
son had seemed much excited during
his conversation and that the other
members of the party had listened in
silence to what he had to say.
From his whole manner" the wit
ness went on, Il infer that he was a
violent partisan of Sampson and cor
respondingly prejudiced against Schley.
He was not content to correct me as to
Admiral Sampson, but seemed willing
TO say bitter things almost vindictively,
against Admiral Schleys'
Mr.. SpOn was Immediately succeeded
by Foster Nichols Of Yonkers, n. Y.
which is Admiral Howisons place of
residence. Mr.. Nichols is interested in
naval publications and in this capac-
ity called upon Admiral Howison. in
July last, for the purpose of securing
from him notes for a biograph of the
admiral.
Was Bitter Against Schley.
He stated that the day on which thr
call was made was very hot and that
on this account the admiral had asked
to be excused from granting an inter
view. Mr.. Nichols said that after
this conversation he had produced a
copy of the work which his house was
getting out, containing a sketch of the
leaders in the Spanish-American war
and containing pictures of Sampson and
Schley. The witness said at the sight
had no business in the navy, and adj
ded that if Schley was in the English
navy he would have been put out for
less cause than there was in this case
Il asked the witness continued, the
reason why SchIey should have been
put out. Admiral Howison replied
For diSobedience of orders. asked
why, if he disobeyed orders. he was
permitted to remain. The ADMIRAL re-
piled: Because he gave the excuse
that he had to go to port to coal; yet,
everybody knows that coaling at sea is
possible
The witness said that he had ex-
pressed surprise at Admiral HowisOn' S
attitude and in reply the admiral had
said:
You would not be surprised if you
were in touch with the sentiment
among naval officers"
Witness said that in response to an
INJURY himself <AuuAiiett NV 47SAi
had explained the absence of Admiral
Sampson from the scene of action when
the Santiago naval battle occurred, by
saying:
''The explanation is that there had
been a lack of cooperation between the
land and naval forces and Sampson
was trying to harmonic them. The
dav on which the battle occurred was
the last day on earth when the Spanish
fleets would have been expected TO
come out"
Howison Makes Reply.
Mr.. Raynor. at THIS point. called the
attention of the court to the fact that
the witnesses testimony had not been
answered. The letter Admiral HOWiSon
had written to Acting Secretary Hack
EFT had not been produced. Neither
had Admiral HOwison been asked Ia
testify. After reading from law au-
thority Mr.. Raynor said that the issue
could not be argued until Admiral
Howison had been heard from.
Judge Advocate Lemly maintained
that Admiral HowiSon could make 3
statement if he desired, either before
or after the argument.
Admiral Howison settled the matter
however, by reaching forward for his
cap and whispering TO Admiral Dewey
The latter then announced that Admira
Howison would make no response al
once. Thereupon Admiral HOwisor
10 TIE priv dlt elpdA AAl4CntS Il
the rear and the court took an informa
recess.
J The court remained absent from tn,
room for about fifteen minutes, am
when it reconvened Admiral HowisoT
presented his reply to the charges made
| against himself. His statement wal
| typewriter and was as follows:
| Mr.. President and Gentlemen: In re
ply to the objection to me as membel
of this court, I submit a copy of my
| personal letter to the Hon. +. w. Hack
EFT, which has been made public by
the navy department
Does Not Remember Spon.
Mr.. Frost. 1 think. is answered in
this letter above referred to. Mr.
] Spon's statement is one I cannot father
I 1 positively do not remember his fac,
/ at all. Mr.. FrOsts face is familiar
] although 1 have not seen him for tw.
statement. only last October. Mr.
Nichols did call at my house at Yon
/ kers on a very hot day on his owl
/ business. He would not take no ad
! mittance" for an answer, and durin;
/ his stay he did discuss with me severa
/ naval matters. among which was tn
| Sampson Schley much-talked-of affair
/ Our talk was short. as l desired him +
leave me in peace.
| Il desire to say that I am, as yOl
| know, here to obey the orders of the de
partment to- report to you for duty a
a member of this court; it is not op
] tional with me to obey, or not obey
these orders. My commission require
, obedience.
These orders were not sought by me