The San Francisco call., 1901-10-31
Vessels Lost in Smoke.

In response to a question the witness testi-
fed that during part of the battle the In
the Brooklyn.
When the Colon surrendered why did you
not take. possession of her and aim 10 save
Il sent aboard to receive her surrender and
was proceeding TO do that very thing when the
flagship came up L am satisfied she was all
right when l left for the eastward"
Where did you obtain your statement to the
ward when the Brooklyn's turn was nader
From the report OF the board of officers
who charted the courses of the ships July g."
.:You testified that dispatch No. TO- dated
May q, was not delivered you until June 1o?''
Did you know by what means that report
reached you?''
THAT would be difficult to state
he had with Lieutenant Commander Hodgson
before the loop was made. He said he could
not recall a single word except the latter's
statement that the enemy was coming straight
for them. He had never been able to recall
.'Did you give out for publication Lieutenant
Commander Hodgson's categorical denial?"
II did,
The witness stated that he would still say
that he had desired to set Hodgson right as
well himself. but he had done nothing in
that direction because the department ordered
an investigation
At 2:3s p m Captain Lemly concluded his
cross-examination, which had been begun at
the beginning of the morning session of Mon
Captain Lemly said:
He turned to Mr.. Raynor. who said: I'VE
have not, single question"
At the conclusion of the cross examination
there was placed in evidence the telegram
10, saying in substance that he did not desire
to assume entire credit for the victory OF
the command of Admiral Sampson
In reply to a question he said he had taken
| this dispatch to Admiral Sampson, who said
he was very glad had sent it and thought it
awho was generous?" asked Captain Par
II. of course"
The first of the courts questions referred to
the blockade of Cienfuegos and was fol-
While off Cienfuegos could you see the shore
| to the westward so distinctly as to form an
| idea of the feasibility of making a landing
there?"
frmative and in reply to the next question said
he had seen fishermen fishing boats on
shore with whom he could have communi-
Gated
Also, replying to a question of the court, he
said he. could not recollect at all the conver-
sation between himself and Lieutenant Hodg
Had the Spanish fleet left Santiago and gone
to the westward at the same time you left
Cienfuegos could it not have passed between
Il think not. I laid my course thinking that
southwark and that would give me a wider
point of observation"
WAS not the situation at Santiago on Nav
II think the risks would have been varv
great; too great in my judgment. We might
have lost collier.
''Did not Captain Cotton inform you that tba
Harvard had coaled at St. Nicholas and that
one large ship at time could coal there ?s'
Il do not recall that. His information 70
me referred mainly to small vessels, as recoI.
lect it"
Nothing about coaling the Harvard?'' broke
in Admiral Ramsay.
mo I think not
''Did the report of the Merrimac iniurv Lea
you to believe she was hopelossly disabIsd %;
Practically so. Her intermediate valve was
broken.
.sVhat was your object in seeking to devs,o
the batteries at Santiago?'' oP
81 desired to know what was in front os -
in the possibility of being obliged 10 forcs
the entrance 0iee
.'Did you not risk the loss of a shin Nav
s1?.' SNIP May
'T thought such a possibility remote in view
of the range given. 'e"
How did you know the prevailing winds -
Cane Cruise were west and southwest p, nus ae
From the pilot
You stated that the movement uvss.,,..,
was based upon military principles WI.
then. did you go back to Santiago" "nS'
For the reason l have stated Afta- A.
coal supply was edualized did not lose rncb