The age-herald., 1901-10-31

we had gone in closer, but if we had steamed more slowly, there would have been no gain, as the range would have been narrower. It was a case of tweedle- dee on the one hand and of tweedledum on the other.''
 The cross-examination of Admiral Schley on the battle of Santiago began with a question as to what the first movement of the Brooklyns helm was after the enemy's ships were sighted com ing out
 We were heading west by north" he replied. '"rhe first helm was to port"
 Captain Cook gave the order for the turn?'
 Yes" .#e
 You regard that turn as very impor- tant, do you not?"
 T think it was the movement that de- cided the events of that day."
 As to the Loop.
 The admiral said in response to uues- tions that he had not mentioned the loon in his report of the battle. It was an in- cident of the battle which he had no idea would ever come into controversy. Cap tain Cook had given the orders without orders from him, except under his gen. eral instructions to close in and keep HO~AAN " ASi O oDout 1OOU ydTuS away, outside of the broadside torpedo range. When the time came for the turn, Captain Cooks conception of the movement coin clded with his own. Though Captain cook gave the order he would have done so had the captain of the Brooklyn failed to do so.
 Do you assume full responsibility for the turn?"
 Absolutely. If did not give the order l approved it." replied the admiral.
 Why the Loop Was Made.
 He had been under the impression unt,, later that the starboard engine of the Brooklyn was backed to facilitate tbe turn. He recollected distinctly that he waSned Captain Cook as the enemy an preached that they were going to ram nlm. He was closely questioned as to the order which went below, ito stand bv to ram." " 'o
 In answer to a question he said he sun- posed the captain had given the order lie was not certain. His attention was called to letter of June 3, 1900. written from the South Atlantic station in which the admiral was quoted as saying that the turn was made to avoid his last attempt of the Viscaya to ram. but as the letter could not be produced at the time he was not questioned upon 1t. His atten- ton was next called to his letter to- the Senate In which he said the turn was made to avoid blanketing the fire of his own ships and also to his statemen in examination in chief that he had not turned to port because to do so would have brought the ship into dangerous proximity to the enemy's vessels and ex- posed her to possible torpedo attacks or ramming.
 NOW" said Captain Lemly, there ap pear to be three reasons why you made the turn. Why did you make that turn?'
 "As already stated in my direct testi- mony there is very much more impor- tant reason which you have not asked and that was that the ship might con- tinue in action and beat the enemy as we did. That was the controlling one of all"
 Have you stated that?" asked Captain Lemly, to which Admiral Schley replied:
 T never stated that because I thought it was evident I never stated it for three or four reasons. There are several other reasons we could perhaps conjure up about 1t. I have them In mind. I have stated in relation to the Senate docu-- ment that that matter was prepared very hurriedly and here have stated the gen eral purposes or at elast what the move- ment was intended to accomplish"
 'Did you have each of these varied req sons in mind at the time?'
 Probably all of them and others"
 After recess. the admiral was asked what conversation he had had with Lieu tenant Hodgson on the Brooklyn just before the loop was made He said he could not recall word of conversation with Mir. Hodgson beyond the latter's re- mark that the enemy was coming for them, and his response to go for them. except some remark about the proximity of the Texas. He did not now recall, and he had never been able to recall, a col loquy.
 The witness stated that he would still say that he had desired to set Hodgson right as well as himself. but he had done