New-York tribune., 1901-10-09

said: N ~
pd OF course am very sorry ever SO far for
empefsfe yse as to write letter containing such IN
In tha eer eqt pnfeT aid eat cos 6 at the
Rapsr s Of fl lying for printing that statement In fact
paper auhofS oaS9ve to s from 1 lying that h the
Hsss wa 10 OF the gist of that statement. The lying
displayed such trepidation and cowardice on the
The ne cay d Of that battle that he from
from he crs9y away from m M the fight in order detraet
that ma battle: that they wished also to detract from
6e eon Gret of of Of all the officers Of the Brooklyn on
ngght: ngara 1t was the words to that extent that
eeeqTy eess W unless man the verbal correct
paper as sr far S6 DID not the
COMMANDER WAINWRIGHT CALLED
Observation-Disclosures Hodgson being excused
Commander Wainwright was called Cantajn
Lemly began his examination by drawing from
the witness that he had been a member and lat
terly the senior member of the board which had
oihclally acted in making the chart showing the
positlons OF the American and Spanish ships at
santiago The witness told how conclusions were
reached by that board He said:
the board % as senior member Of the board
skstehed which e had been deferm1ed sy
ships came out and afterward When they Went
put Of his hp at hpf me
the eay faeTe great M deal of dfeusson as to
sible to get any position by bearings. and there
We're somewhat incorrect and the fra decision of
possible. but none of the positions considered
ings. even if had had correct chsrt 'i1 Was ap-
Of the vesHe o II gave idea Of the positions
Mr Reyner asked If IT was true. as had been
officially stated in the report that the positions
were assigned from known bearings"
Ihe witness replied that the statement IN
correct. that they established by estimated
bearings Most OF the positions were he said
fixed by discussions among the nayigators con-
stituting the board. although Captain Chadwick
was before the board The navisators had done
the best they could in plotting the vessels and
had made it as nearly correct possible long
after the engagement, as had been stated by the
board.
BROOKLYN AND TEXAS MISPLACED.
Asked by Mr. Rayner about the places assigned
TO the Brooklyn and the Texas while the former
vessel was making her loop. Commander Vain
wright said he did not consider them correct. For
myself" he said 'I was never satisfied with the
places assigned"
He said further that. while the board had done
the best it could the time board. 1t had
not done the best it could to satisfy any member
of the board. 'It the best could do to get
all the members OF the board to sign the report"
he said.
who, in addition to yourself. not salts
fed?' asked Mr.. Rayner
"I would not like to say" replied the witness.
'I know that the navigator OF the Texas not
for / think were satisfied except the
navigator Of the Brooklyn. and don't know that
he was"
But Notwithstanding you ALL including the
navigator of the Brooklyn. dissatisfied you signed
the report?'
That is correct"
On redirect examination Commander Wainwright
said that in making the chart all the members Of
the board at liberty to contribute whatever
data they had or make whatever arguments they
might desire. He also said that the chart a
compromise OF opinions.
In response to further questions the witness said
he did the Brooklyn the day OF the bat
tie of Santiago.
Questions were put by the court and answered as
follows:
Were the positions OF the ships shown the
chart In question obtained from testimony taken
by the board from general discussion by the
members of the board?"
Almost entirely by general discussion by the
members of the board. Captain Chadwick and Cap
tain Cook appeared and discussed the matter with
the board"
From the position Of the Gloucester at the COM
mencement OF the battle OF July 8, could you see
both the Brooklyn and the Texas?"
II do not remember seeing the Brooklyn and the
Texas at the commencement OF the battle"
What orders. If any. were signalled by the
Brooklyn to the fleet during the engagement Of
July 81
II saw none"
Mr.. Rayner-This does not mean that signals
were displayed. does it?
mo, 1t does not"
By the court-Did any one of the Spanish vessels
change her to the southwark II intending
| to Of the feet?
'I saw no signs Of It"
| LIEUTENANT BRISTOLS EVIDENCE
Commander Wainwright then excused and
| Lieutenant NJ. L. Bristol, former watch and di-
vision officer of the Texas. was called He had only
related the arrival Of the Texas at Cienfuegos and
detailed conditions there when the court took a
| recess.
Lieutenant Bristol continued his testimony at the
| afternoon session Speaking OF the blockade OF
Cienfuegos he said that during the day the ships
lay miles from the shore, steaming in
night; then going further out and return
| ing at daybreak. He had. he said. observed
the signal lights the shore near Cienfuegos, but
| had not understood their significance. With re-
spect to coaling he said that on one occasion while
| off Cienfuegos Captain Philip had signalled to the
flagship that he considered 1t dangerous TO put the
| collier between the Texas and the Iowa, meaning
by that" said the witness. that II was dangerous
| to a collier put 1t between two battleshps re-
gardless Of weather. He also told of the injury
to the Texas in coaling while off Santiago, put SAID
! it was not due to the weather.
| The witness also described the blockade off San
| tiago saying that it maintained by steaming
back forth in front Of the mouth or the haroor
| at as slow rate speed the ships could travel
(at eight hundred yards. or double distance, aparO
| The line was about and one-half miles long
| The vessels generally steamed from three and one
half to five either side Of the harbor going
| and coming practically over the same line. Ihe
| Marblehead and the Vixen were on the inside, but
could only be seen at certain times even when the
| weather conditions favorable. Frequently, II
fact only the vessel next ahead could be seen
| NO ORDERS TO MEET SPANISH SHIPS.
! Mr. Hanna here asked the witness: III the yes
sells of the Spanish squadron had suddenly appeared