The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-11-01
CHADWICK AND
 SIGSBtE AGAIN

(Continued from Page one.) sebuttal? That would lead to an inter- mi ,able casr. The rule of law is you can fsblt anything new that we have brought out, but you cannot call witnesses to sus- tain folme statements they have made. There is no objection to witness in re- bustal.
 Captain Lemley-Counsel is wrong when he says I closed the case. l did not clcse il. simply sad: We rest here" and propose to call further wlt, nesses hereafter. am only going to call such witnesses as the court thinks nec- esssry in order to have the facts before He contended that this is an inquiry and not prosecution and that the usual rules of opening and closing and Of re- butal and sur-rebuttal in ordinary cases of laws were not to be followed in this case,
 The controversy between counsel con tinued for some time. MT. Hanna said ne had had a conversation with MT. Ray hor in which the latter had promised to be liberal in rebutting testimony. Re- plying MT. Raynor said that his promise had only applied to rebuttins testimony
 MT. Hanna then took up the question of the treatment of the case. lie LOOK especial exception to the characterlza- ton of his and Captain Lemley's con duct of the case as & prosecution" On this point he said:
 Hanna Greatly Wrought Up.
 s.As to the use of the language which has been employed here, that this Is very like a prosecution, can not allow the record to stand in that shape, without saying word or two upon that point. If this case has in any manner approach cd that of a prosecution, it has been due to the action of the applicant and his counsel.
 "Out of generous consideration to the applicant, we have allowed every tech nica1 rule of the law to be invoked in his interest. That is not prosecution. Everything that the law has devised to screen and protect and defend a man who Is under any sort of a charge, has been allowed to come in before this court of inquiry. That was in favor of the appli- ant and not against him.
 Now. a naval court of inquiry has the absolute right to ask any question which t may choose of anybody in any manner in which it chooses to prosecute it's in- auiry. 1t will not do to lay down these technical rules as absolutely binding. If the court pleases to adhere to them. well and good, but we do not desire to have our proceedings here. when the applicant Is represented by able and skilled coun- placed upcn the Judge Advocate and his associates. It is an outrageous and un- warranted use of the word
 Replying Mir. Raynor said that he had
  cution, but said that he had referred to It as trial" and had so considered it.. He also refused to concede that any spe- tiai generosity had been displayed in the ease.
 Captain Parker called the attention of the court to the naval regulations for 1900 in which the word prosecution" is used in connection with courts of in quiry.
 The court then at 12:56 took a recess until o'clock without deciding the point
 Schley Loses Decision.
 When the co lrt Ieconvened After recess Admiral Dewey srnounced the decision of the court on the question of rebutting testimony.
 The language of .he court was as fol- lows:
 'The court has considered the matter which was before t before recess and de- cides as follows:
 Admiral Schley requested the Depart ment to take such action as may bring under discussion and review of his broth CTS in arms certain criticisms made upon him. This request indicated that he de- sired the Department to order a court of inquiry to investigate the portions of his naval career to which such criticisms re ferred.
 "ln pursuance of this request the De- partment ordered court of inquiry tC thoroughly inquire into all the circum stances bearing upon the subject of in- vestigation. direct the attention of tht court to certain important points and or dered the court to report all the perti- nent facts which it may deem establish ed. The court is therefore required to eX- anime all witnesses who may have any knowledge of the matters brought to it's attention and is not bound by any tech nical laws requiring evidence or proceed ure and to this end witnesses may be called at any time or they may be re- called to make corrections or additions in the nature of corrections to their tes- timonv that the facts of the case may. if possible, be placed clearly before the court. but no witness shall reiterate form CT statements"
 The latter part of this decision was read by Captain Lemly to the witness in or der that he might confine his answer in accordance herewith. Captain Lemly corrections of his testimony or such ad- ditions in the nature of corrections as he might desire.
 Had No Correction.
 Captain Sigsbee answered that he had no correction to make.
 Captain Lemly-You will ind that you tions in the nature of corrections to your testimony This say not for the pur- pose of suggesting anything but merely for the purpose of giving you The oppor- tunity which the court intends you shall have.
 II desire to state that informed Com modore Schley on the occasion of my thought that the St. Paul had beer chased by a torpedo boat on the night of her arrival or the subsequent night second. that l detailed to him the com munication between Goodrich of the St Louis and myself on board the St. Pau as we passed each other when I wai bound from Cape Haytien tc Santiago and the St Louis was bound from San tiago to Cape Haytien."
 The witness said that since he was or the stand he had recalled that he did set thes press boat somers N. Smith on May