The age-herald., 1901-10-29
ADMIRAL SCHLEY IS VERY CLOSELY
 CROSS EXAMINED

.'Yes, off Santiago, for the purpose O. explaining the formation of the blockad, and the methods of attack in case W, met the Spanish fleet"
 battle in writing?"
 ''I did not consider 1t necessary. w, would fight the ships by signal"
 Was there time to place the order o battle in writing?"
 Yes"
 Do not the regulations prescribe tn, order of battle shall be reduced tC writing?'
 T do not recall it."
 The judge advocate then questioned Ad. miral Schley as to the identity of tho cubans who had informed him at Hamp. ton Roads that the portion of the island Of Cuba west of Havana and Cienfuegos was held by the Spanish soldiers. Ht replied that he could not give the names that they were Cubans who had come tc him as commander of the flying squadron to give him that information.
 He was closely questioned as to those present In the cabin of the New York al Key West when he talked over the cam paign with Sampson. Admiral Schley replied that Captain Chadwick had been present part of the time.
 When was this?'
 "On May 1S"
 
 any or all of the instructions he had from the Navy Department"
 No, he simply spoke of confidential in- struetions from the Secretary of the Navy"
 Naval Regulations.
 Captain Lemly then took up the ques- tlon Of naval regulations, in each case asking the witness if he had complied with the terms of the paragraph. The nrst paragraph was 267. and requires the commander-in-chief, in preparing his fleet or squadron to meet the enemy. to communicate his general orders, instruc- tons private orders and all such infor- nation as possible which will enable him on duty or in action at all times.
 T think 1 complied with that" replied the witness
 How, and in what manner?" asked Captain Lemly
 By issuing general orders for the or ganization of the squadron, their instruc- uons and their private signals
 The next article was as follows:
 Article 269-He shall if possible before going into action, communicate to the juniors in command, the chief of staff and the captains, his secret orders, private signals and other information that will materially assist them if called upon to exercise command"
 That 1 do not remember to have com piled with,' said the witness.
 Captain Lemly then read article 271, which provides that the commander-in- chief shall, if possible, before going into action supply every captain with a plan of the battle, showing thereon the posi- ton each shall occupy"
 ''Yes," said the witness, in reply to Captain Lemly's question if he had com piled with that article.
 'I do not understand that 1t is neces- sarily written. think that order is suf- ficiently carried out when a commander in-chief decides to place his crews in the order of battle and informs each what he proposes to do.'
 'tDo you think, admiral, that you can supply every captain with a plan of bat tie and do that at an oral conference?" asked Captain Lemly.
 q do not think that Is absolutely nec- essary," replied the witness.
 There are instances where battles have been fought without doing that. Any plan of battle that might be origi- mated Is subject to change. I have never known a battle that was ever fought on the plan originally chosen" ..aia'.
 Sharp Repartee.
 MT. Rayner-Do any of the regulations use the word 'written?"
 Captain Lemly-Do you think you could supply the captains with a plan of bat tie without writing them?
 MT. Rayner-I could not, but I know the admiral could.
 Continuing his examination, Captain Lemly asked; When at 945 a. nl., May 20, you sighted a man-of-war as shown by the Brooklyn's log, and cleared for action, what orders had been issued in conformity with the provision of the reg ulations?
 q should not think an order would be necessary for a fleet meeting a single vessel except to smash her up."
 Captain Lemly: Could you tell abso- lutely that there was only a single vessel, although you sighted but one"
 "As | only saw one smoke l pre- sumed, of course. there was but one ves- gel. Subsequently we raised the Vesu- vius. which was very much lower in the water"
 Captain Lemly: "As a matter of fact there was more than one vessel?"
 There were two vessels; that was de- veloped later"
 "others might have been developed in the same way?'
 If they had should have pitied them. If they had been separated they would have permitted themselves to be knocked to pieces"
 In answer to a, question from Captain Lemly regarding the orders. Clear ship for action,' Admiral Schley explained that the ships were cleared for action all the time, but there was always cer- tain amount of paraphernalia about the ships to prevent persons falling overheard or awnings which had to be removed, and that that was what he had in mind when he signaled for action
 Which was the closer blockade at Cien- fuegos or at Santiago?
 q think at Cienfuegos. There we were from three to four miles off; at Santiago we were from three and a half to five and a half miles; closer at both places at night
 II don't mean distance; I mean close ness"
 At Santiago. It was closer on account of the method used"
 No Plan of Battle.
 'At Cienfuegos did you issue any plan of battle in case the Spanish fleet should attempt to enter or come out?'
 No, I should have relied on signal"
 You stated in one of your reports that while lying off Cienfuegos you feigned dis order in the squadron in the hope that the Spanish fleet would come out. Did you inform the captains of the squadron of this ruse?'
 NO, I think not. I talked with some of those on board the Brooklyn about it." ''Did you mention it to Captain Cook?' "I do not remember. I talked with him so frequently on every subject that can not recall now whether I mentioned this or not.'
 At o'clock the court took a recess till p. m.
 After the recess the Judge Advocate continued his cross-examination of Ad-