The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1901-10-03
DESCRIBES THE GREAT
BATTLE OF SANTIAGO
Continued from page H.

Commander Sharp said in response
to questions by .4r RaynoT that one
Of the results Of the bombardment Of
the Colon had been TO develop the
Spanish shore batteries. Mr.. Raynor
then asked
DO you recOllect a conversation with
Commodore Schley after the Colon
recognizance in the presence Of Lieu
tenant Harlow. in which the commo-
dore remarked that his purpose had
been not 20 develop the strength of
those batteries2''
'T really do not remember" was the
response. 81 wish 1 could
Vixen Was Near Shore.
In response 20 a question from Mr..
RaynOr. Commander Sharp said that
the position of the Vixen during the
blockade was not correctly given 10y
he official chart. He was nearer the
shore than there shown.
ON redirect examination Captain
Lsmly brought out the fact as to the
change N the Harlow notes
Judge Advocate-Did you attach to
your official report Of July 3 a copy
OF the notes Of said 'ction?
Yes. SIR
Where did YOU obtain this copy2"
From the executive officer. Lieu
tenant Harlow.
Did you at the time know whether
toere were any differences between
this copy IS attached to your official
report and the copy as it appears in
your log book"
Yes. sir: knew there was some
slight differences"
From whom did YOU learn that there
were these Differences. and was any
- explanation made Of this fact to YOU -
when I was writing my report Of
the action OF July 3 I said TO Lieuten-
ana Harlow; I desire a copy of your
notes taken during the action to ac-
company my report to tho admiral
lis reply, as near as now remember
u. was Those notes were taken for
the representative Of a newspaper on
BOARD the Brooklyn and I would ike
10 make some changes in them
said. Very well. wish the notes to go
with my report He aftorward submit
ted to me the notes written in script
which / read over and enclosed in my
report To- the admiral"
Account of the Battle.
Mention has been made of the copy
Of the notes sent 10 the Brooklyn which
were printed on board that vessel. Do
you recognize that paper?" Handing
him n printed pamphlet)
7 nave seen copy OF this before. If
] am not mistaken several We're sent
through the Vixen"
what docs it purport 10 be?''
An account Of the engagement with
tAlN 1lafilSL squadron as seen from the
united States steamship Vixen Julv
? 1895. United states Steamship Brook
iyn. nagship."
At this point Judge Advocate Lem
" had the witness compare the origi-
nal copy of tine Harlow notes with the
copy printed on board the BROOKLYN:
with the result Of showing that fhe
notes had been changed before being
rented So AZ to IKE the account saw
that at 1906 the two leading ships OF
HHHaH
starboaTd quarter" instead of on her
-starhoard bow" and that at l1:45 the
rnoklvn was "one point on port bow
instead Of zone point on starboard
bow. The court then adjourned for
luncheon.
when the court reconvened after
lunch. Captain Lemly continued his
questioning OF Commander sharp con-
corning the changes in the notes male
by Lieutenant Harlow as follows:
Judge Advocate: In the entry made
In your loE. hour 1915. the two leading
ships OF the enemy are given as well
on the starboard bow of TIE Brooklyn
are th@y not?''
Commando Sharp Geadias): The
tv-o leading enemy'S ships We're well on
her starooord bow. yes sir"
Now in the copy printed on the
Ero0klyn what is the bearing Of those
ships?'
Placed Brooklyn Ahead.
Co Pmander sharp Creading,: "The
two leading ships were well on fer
starboard quarter" II says quarter
here and bow" In the notes of the
Nixe1's log.
Then the Brooklyn is placed further
ahead by the printed copy 90 tie log.
~ she not2~
cither further ahead or the ships
Of n be spanish fleet further asrern, yes
I'm hs entry mace ut HAS a. N. it
appc1rsA from your log that the Brook
ivn boreN one point on the port bow OF
the VixeN does IL not?"
CommenN sharp treadiaEl: THE
BROOKLYN N ooist ~ The port bow
distant abouN three miles" IN the no,es
"BrooSiy9 on\ point on thc starboard
distar, about oNree mil IS"
What is the taect Of the Different IS
between the CODY Of the log book AMI
the notes."
"Ths copy Of The Brooklyns PRINTED
notes would put Ehe Brooklyn further
FL shore or the Vixen further out, sir,
s the case might hey
Cross-exa mining the witness Captain
Parker elected from HIM the state
ment th-t the print Of the word star
board" IN Lieutenant Hariow's entry for
Id - printed i'm the Brooklyn print
or the note correspondent with the Of
hcial print aS given in The a.iDcndfx.
that word being given place or che word
Captain Parker also called the at
tenu9n Of the witness 20 5he entry IN
Lieutenant Harlow's notes wherein he
etyS Ills. che Iowa is gaining on
che Massac husetts." and asked IL he
Pad read the notes at the tfme-at the.
scue time calling his attention to the
et that the Massachusetts was then
1T Guantanamo.
Point Was Overlooked.
Commander Sharp replied that he did
rend the notes. but thougnt he must
have overlooked this notation.
Captain Parker then asked whether
f. was not true that the changes from
the original copy appearing IN The
Brooklyn print had been made bv
Lieutenant Harlow himself before he
delivered the transcript 20 him fSharp). /
TO- Commodore Schley. The witness |
replied that he lid not think 20.
Captain Parker-You can hardly re- /
member AZ this time whether the /
Brooklyn was on the starbOard or port /
bow. can your
Yes. sir, my impression is she was on |
the port boz"
Captain Parker-Now knowing that 4
fact, ray II not be possible that. bsCore 1
you sent those notes on board or took /
them on board to the cormodore the J
word -starboard" may have been
changed into port" or vice versa n
20 q he