New-York tribune., 1901-10-31
SANTA GO BATTLE REFOUGHT
CROSS OF ADMIRAL
SCHLEY BY CAPTAIN LEAfLY
ENDED.
by The Associated Press

Washington, Oct. 30.-Admiral Schley's testi-
rnony began to-day where IL left of yesterday, TAX
ing UP different phases OF the blockade of Sam
fiago and passing from that 10 the reconnaissance
nf May 81 when the Colon was bombarded. The
battle OF July left for the last subject to be
ronsidered.
The first question Captain Lenly asked was
whether the Iowa with the Flying Squadron
81 Hampton Roads when Admiral Schley gave the
captains Of the ships their verbal orders TO at
tacing the enemy's feet Admiral Schley replied
that she He first met the Iowa of Glen
5negos Captain Evans then Ill, and Com
1nander Rodgers was in command He did not
recollect whether he had communicated the verbal
nrders 10 the latter. He first saw Captain Evans
on May %.
IIe was then questioned 20 his conversation
with Captain Folger when the latter suggested q
circular blockade, such existed az Wei-Hai-
Wei. The witness said he thought the feet was
larger than that al Wei-Hai-Wei, and that there
were hanking vessels in that feet. He was asked
whether he did consider circular blockade,
with the vessels pointing in as mobile as the other
form. in that the ships could move either way by
turning with the same helm. The Admiral replied
that he thought circular blockade, where all the
vessels charged 10 the centre, would produce con-
fusion, and inevitably lead a different arrange
Inent. according as the enemy moved east west
THE outcome" he said, could only be more or
less confusing, such as actually did occur later
The Admirals attention was called to Captain
Foleer's that the latter had advised him
10 go IN closer al Santiago and his own statement
signalled that they within range of the bat
leries The Admiral; in reply. changed the date
signal. L think the forts may open this range"
was in practicav the same postfon as on lie dsV
Foger testified he had asked schley 10 go in closer
The witnesses attention then called 10 his
statement that neither al Cienfuegos nor Santiago
asked how he knew this He replied that he only
knew ii because he never heard Of any ship getting
man succeeded IN getting through the blockading
line into Havana, the fact had been widely adver-
therefore. was that none had entered
BoMBARDMENT OF THE COLON
Coming TO the reconnaissance OF May 81. when
she Colon was bombsrded in the harbor al Ssnti-
ago, Captain Lemly asked Admiral Schley when
he first received notice that the Commander in
Chief would be al Santiago The witness replied
that the notice in the dispatch brought TO him
by Captain Cotton, which was dated May %. This
telegram was not received until May 81. Possibly,
100, the New-Orleans might have brought informa-
mon OF the coming Of Admiral Sampson
why did you wait two days after the discovery
OF the presence Of the feet in the harbor before
undertaking your Reconnaissance"
For the reason ! had used those two days for
coaing the vessels Of the feet, be pre-
rared in case the enemy should come out
He said he recalled that Captain Bigginson had
asked after he went aboard the Massachusetts that
the bombardment be postponed until after dinner:
that he warned some people 10 get OF the turrets.
and that Lieutenant Commander Potts had given
notice that they the range. He did not
recall the signal not 10 go IN closer, but # was
possible that such a signal had been sent and not
recorded. II might be that 81 with this. a.
with other signals. which had not been recorded
because the writing OF them always deferred
until the next day.
No man" he said, except the press correspond
ents who brave ell dangers. always have paper
and pencil az hand while a battle is IN progress,
and as 8 consequence there is failure TO record
many occurrences that should be recorded
Here followed an examination OF the various
signals from the Massachusetts the day OF the
bombsroment. which the Admiral verified He
thought there were other signals unrecorded He