Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1901-11-07
THE CONCLUDING
ARGUMENT MADE.
Iudge-Advocate Lemly Closed for Navy De-
partment- Reviews Points for Appli-
cant, Then Presents His Side.

Ing himself into the presence Of the
enemy.
LEMLY EXPLAINS HIS POSITION.
Capt. Lemly said:
with the conclusion Of the very brief
address with which | shall close the
argument In this inquiry, my principal
connection with II ceases and the mat
ter Is In your capable hands. ] may
add that while my duties here have
been arduous and necessarily somewhat
painful, am proud TO have been assoc
clated with this distinguished court,
which is TO pass upon the most import
ant question ever considered by
naval court--a question as | defined II
In the early course Of the proceedings,
between the applicant and the morale
of the service. In entering upon my
duties as Judge advocate of the court,
| had In mind advice given me by the
secretary Of the navy soon after my APP
pointment as follows; Admiral Schley
asks for court Of inquiry. A per-
fectly impartial court Is constituted.
The judge-advocate and any counsel
assisting him. are not, (hnd their duty
In this respect Is plain in court to pro-
secute anybody or to find anybody gull
~. but to bring out the facts and aid
the court In declaring the truth.
II have endeavored TO follow this ad-
vice without fear or favor II ! have
appeared to fail In maintaining that
impartial attitude which feel and have
always felt towards the applicant. II Is
because aggression, however natural,
on the part Of earnest counsel begets
aggression. and for the further reason
that In many instances throughout the
Investigation honest difference Of opin-
ion has compelled me to be earnestly
contentious In order to adduce
what / believed TO be material
facts. ] deemed 1t not In
appropriate should here remark
that the navy department IN this mat
ter has maintained an entirely neutral
attitude; that ] have not been inter-
fered with by II in any conduct OF the
case; that as the record demonstrates,
there has been no alteration OF the de-
partments records; that officers on
duty even In the much-abused bureau
Of navigation, have freely testified Ia
behalf Of the applicant and am conf
| dent that the evidence adduced fully
| justified the views OF the department,
| set forth In its reply Of February 8,
| 1899, 10 the Senate committee on naval
| affairs wherein II is said Of Commodore
Schley referring particularly to the
naval battle OF July 3, 1898,
| DEPARTMENTS VIEWS QUOTED
"cwhere SO much was achieved Ia
| this eliminating battle, and where his
ship was such a conspicuous force In
| the fight, his conduct while In indie
| pendent command prior TO June l. the
! record of which has been given above
| and which, by reason OF It's pnsteadl-
ness in purpose and push and In failure
| to obey orders. did not meet the APP
| prevail OF the President and the depart
ment, has yet not permitted 1t to stand
In the way OF his nomination for promo
ton TO higher grade for the part he
took in the final triumph
Capt. Lemly then said that the vol
| luminous evidence had been so fully
treated In all its bearings that II was
| not his purpose TO enter upon de-
tailed discussion Of IT, He said that un-
der the then existing conditions Of tn,
| wind and weather greater speed might
| have ben maintained on the passage OF
the flying squadron from Key West {,
Cienfuegos. II should, he thought be
remembered that Commodore Schley''
orders required that the blockade o.
that port be established with the leas
possible delay.
Reference was made 10 the interview
with Capt. Chester, OF the Cincinnati
on this trip. and Capt. Lemly said;
ALREADY, as appeared from their con
versation. Commodore Schley, though
treasured by Capt. Chester, was trou
hled In his own mind over coal condi
tons and the problem OF coallng at sea
demonstrating that at the very offse
he was brewing trouble"