The sun., 1901-10-22


Another Copy Received on tho
xad, With Orders 10 Proceed to SAN
tiaxo with Ali Despatch secre-
tary wells Tells of the Brcekiyu's
part In the battle Of santiago
Preparatieus Made while Chasing the
Colon TO Como to Close quarter
Capt. Cook Correcu His Testimony.
wAsHIxoroS. Oct. 2i.-Nearly the entire
four hours that the Schley Court Of Inquiry
was In session to-day was taken up In n
rigid crosse examination OF Lieut. Il. W.
Wells, who was Flag Secretary to Admiral
Sclley In the Spanish American War and
had charge Of his correspondence. The
most important development Of that cross
examination, which was conducted by Mr..
Hanna. the Judge Advocates assistant.
was the practical concession OF Lieut..
Wells that the Dear Schley- letter from
Admiral Sampson had been received by
Commodore Schley OF Cenfuegos on May %
1895 and the admission OF Mr.. Rayner.
following that conces-ion. that tho letter
was delivered 20 Schley by the commander
OF the Dupont on the date received.
Admiral schley confirmed the admission.
Judge Advocate Lemly and Mr.. Hanna
had virtually shown heretofore that tho
.pear Schley. letter went by the Dupont.
but were hot able TO prove that fact abso-
h,ely by Pny Of their own witnesses This.
however they succeeded In doing through
a witness obviously friendly To Admiral
Schley and called In his defence.
Tho importance Of the Dear Schley'
LITTER has been explained over and over
again. Il has been one Of the strongest
points brought forward In behalf OF Ad-
miral Schley. In mat communication
6aup.on told Schley that although the
Navy Department strongly advised that
schlsy be sent TO Santiago. where the De-
partment believed Cervera 20 be. II was
sampson's Judgment that the Flying Squad
ron remain Mt Genfnegos
This letter was dated May 20. On the
following day sampson. having received
more reliable information, sent word To
schley 20 60 to Santiago with all despatch,
n satisfied that the Spanish feet was not
nj Cienfuegos. sampson followed this
Nth a memorandum making definite the
order TO 60 IL has been admitted by
Admiral schley in his defence 10 the Senate
that he got tho order TO 20 and the more
.neciho memor andum by the Hawk on the
morning OF MAY %. ises but as the Dear
sohleys letter came enclosed with these
doubts over the location Of tina Spanish
feet
The Judge Advocate has been contending
that the Dear Schley- letter was received
on Nav y. and that IL could therefore not
baye CONFUSED the situation with refe-
renee 70 dispatches Of later date. received
on MAY Is The production Of an order
from Schiey 20 the senior naval officer on
Santiago, dated May %. brought about the
admission Of Mr. Rayner This order was
n liberal paraphrase Of the Dear Schley'
letter and was plainly written while the
Dear Schley' communication was before
the writer Admiral Schley will now have
TO explain not only how the situation could
have been confused by the Dear Schley'
letter but why he told the Senate that IL
was received on May %. with the orders
telling him 10 60 Co Santiago.
Lieut. wels's direct testimony was nearly
finished on Friday. when the Court was
last In session, and he was asked very few
questions by Admiral Schley's counsel
to-day. No new evidence was developed
by these queries.
In Lieut. Wells's cross-e1 amin alton bv
Mr. Hanna, twas shown that the metal
receiving stamp Of the Brooklyn was not
used to mark the receipt of important
communications. that endorsements noting
their receipt were written In pencil by
Commodore Schley and Lieut.. Wells. and
that on the Dear Schley- letter and the
order 20 20 10 Santiago the date OF receipt
written originally % had been changed
20 May % Lieut. Wells said that the date
had probably becn originally MAY 2s hut
he could not remember why the change
had been made. He suggested that II
was an original mistake that had been
corrected When these letters were first
produced In court tho Judge Advocate
said that tho endorsement on tho Dear
Schley- letter had been altered from -?s
TO % or from - 10 -. don't know which.
No book recording official communi-
cations received on the Brooklyn required
by tho naval regulations. was ever turned
In to tho Navy Department 10y Admira
Schley. who said that he had furnished al
his Official papers 90 H. Lieut. Wells sale
on the stand to-day that there was no sucf
book. Iieutenant-C Commander Sears. Flal
Lieutenant 20 Admiral Schley In the war
testified when he was on the stand that ther,
was such book and that Lieut.. Wells
kept Il. During Lieut.. wells's Testimony
to-day there wcro several pointed hint
thrown out about missing ofcial docu
nenis.
CAPT COOK ooRREcTs his TESTIMONY.
Capt. W. r Cook Of the Brooklyn. callec
20 correct his former testimony, was th'
frs, witness this morning who had anything
interesting 20 say. lie made this state
ment
In nv testimony I said that tho Oregon
on the morning Of July =, was under al
boilers having shifted her boilers from
forward 20 aft | stated this from hearsa
and presumed u to be correct, as account
ing Tor her extraordinary speed. ! hnc
that she did not shift boilers that morning
hut that she had steam on all her boilers n
ali times while on the Santiago blockade
When Passed Assistant surgeon ID
Nalin of the BROOKLYN was on the stand &
correci his testimony he was asked 10y
Capt Parker. junior counsel for Admin
Sohley. something about the identity of thu
Lieutenant who. according 20 the witness
came 20 him AT Portsmouth, y. IL, anc
questioned him In regard 90 tho conver
Satinn or colloquy he Overheard hetwc~f
Commodore Schlev and Navigator hodg
son On tho Rrooklvn during the execution
- tho loop Capt Parker never loss
an opportunity 60 make Lieut. Ward promi
IA fla f.aag IL hs who pllfeCtssf