The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1901-12-19

b. Inc majority OF the court, III TIC
opinion rendered, have entirely failed to
refer to dispatch No. admitted to have
been sent by Admiral Sampson to Com
modore Schley, the construction of which
was agreed upon in the argument of the
case, to-wit: That it was an impera-
tive order for Commodore Schley to hold
his squadron off Cienfuegos whether the
Spanish fleet was or was not in that
port.
Z. The majority of the court in the
opinion rendered, have entirely ignored
the admitted fact that the commander of
the Eagle failed to communicate the
situation at Cienfuegos to Commodore
Schley.
8. The majority of the court in the
opinion rendered, hav entirely ignored
the uncontradicted evidence in the case
that Captain Robley D. Evans, knowing
of the signal lights on shore at Cienfue-
gos failed to communicate his informa-
tion concerning them to Commodore
Schley.
8. The majority of the court in the re-
port of facts submitted declare that the
signal lights on shore near Cienfuegos
were seen by Commodore Schley on the
night of May 22nd, 1898, when, in fact,
the overwhelming weight of both oral
and documentary evidence proved that
Commodore Schley saw and had knowl-
edge of these lights, only on the night of
May 23rd., and at no other time.
10. The majority of the court, in the
opinion rendered are silent on the sub
| ject of the following charge preferred by
| the Judge Advocate against Commodore
| Schley during the progress of the inves-
| tigation, namely: That he did not mask
| his movements in departing from in
| front of the port of Ciehfuegos, but by
| using Ardois signals he revealed the des-
| tinaton of his squadron to the enemy on
! shore; despite the fact that by over
whelming weight of testimony this
charge was entirely disproved.
| H. The majority of the court have
| based their opinion in reference to the
retrograde movement upon statement
made in their report of facts that Com
| nodore Schley before sailing from Cien-
| 'uegos, received reliable information that
| ships could be coaled in the vicinity of
| Cape Cruz and Gonaives Channel, and it
| IS now respectfully denied that there was
| any such positive testimony in this case;
| every witness with one exception who
| was examined on the subject disavowed
/ Ill knowledge in reference thereto, and
he uncontradicted testimony of Captain
| F.. T.. Cook establishes the fact that the
| official charts with which the flagship
| Brooklyn was supplied, and upon which
| Commodore Schley was compelled to re-
| ly for information showed coaling at
| Cape Cruz be neither feasible nor practi-
| ,able, and the records clearly show that
| not until the 9th of May, three days
! after leaving Cienfuegos, when Captain
| Chas. S. Cotton visited the flagship
Brooklyn, did Commodore Schley receive
| my definite information concerning the
| feasibility or practicability of coaling his
| hips fro ma collier in Gonaives Chan
nel, all of which facts have been wholly
| gnored by the majority of the court in
formulating their said report of facts.
IL. The majority in stating it's reports
| of facts that Commodore Schley received
no positive information of the scout
ships as to the presence of the enemys
| fleet in the harbor of Santiago utterly
| gnores the overwhelming testimony in
proof of the fact that Capt. C. D. Sigs-
| bee did actually report to Commodore
Schley and to others, that the Spanish
| fleet was not in the harbor of Santa go.
| 10. lie OpiulOu Ol the uldJOI1Ly VI Iue
court and the report of facts is silent
l on the subject of proven and admitted
| failure of Captains Wise and Jewell to
communicate the information they had
received in the reference to the presence
| of the Spanish fleet in the harbor of San
tiago to Commodore Schley.
| a. That the report of facts submitted
| by the court states that the conditions
of wind, sea and weather from noon on
] May 26th to June 1st, were favorable for
| taking coal from a collier at sea off
Santiago, when this statement has been
directl contraducted by the evidence Of
witnesses fer the Government.
Is. The tables prepared by Govern
ment experts and admitted in evidence
before the court, showing the coal supply
of the vessels of the flying squadron, with
| reference to their chasing capacity, pro-
4 ceeding at full speed with forced draught,
have not even been adverted to in the
| report of facts
16. There has not been the slightest
| reference made by the majority of the
| court to the orders of the honorable
| Secretary Of the Navy, offered and proved
! in evidence, forbidding the hazarding of
| American ships against shore batteries,
/ but the court has decided against the
| applicant upon the 7th specification of
| the precept, without, in the slightest
! degree, referring to this important evi-
| dence.
| II. The majority of the court have en-
tirely failed to give any opinion as to
/ the character of the blockade off San
| tiago, although the same was included
in the Sth specification of the precept,
and by specific direction the court was
obligated to give an opinion thereupon.
ls.-The majority opinion of the court
that Commodore Schley should have en-
deavored to capture or destroy the Span
lsh vessels at anchor near the entrance
OF santiago harbor on May Goth and
30th, and that he did not do his utmost
with the force under his command to
capture or destroy the Colon and other
| vessels of the enemy on Nav 31st. is
wholly at variance with the orders under
which Commodore Schley was acting be-
fore Santiago, said orders, as is attested
by number, dated May 21st 1895 and
sent by Admiral Sampson to Commodore
Schley, restricting his operation to the
maintenance of a blockade of the port of
Santiago. ii the enemy should be found
therein; and also said opinion is utterly
and abSOlufa1y at variance with tho 0yor-