The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1901-10-16
SUMTER. S. c.. WEDNESDAY. OCTOBER lo. 1901.
watch officer on the Scorpion as wit


Commodore schley from the Eagle
which that vessel had brought from
Capt. McCalla on May 10, 1898, when
the flying squadron, then bound for
Cienfuegos, fell in with Capt. Nc
Calais sub-squadron, which had just
left that port. The government had
sought to show that by this message
Commodore Schley had been notified
that the Spanish feet was not in the
harbor of Cienfuegos and Lieut.. Com
mander Switzerland of the Eagle, had
testified that he had megaphoned to
the Scorpion that there we're only a
torpedo boat and several cannoieros in
that harbor. Capt. Lemly told the
court today that the log of the Scorp-
ion did not show the receipt of
the message in this form and that
there was no evidene to show the de-
livery of tie message to Commodore
Schley.
Other witnesses today were Lieut..
Commander W. II. Schuetze, who
served on the Iowa, and Lieut.. a. ".
Grant, who was on the Massachusetts,
who testified concerning the general
campaign Of the flying squadron.
Lieut.. E. F. Leipner concluded his
testimony begun yesterday. Capt.
LemIy asked him concerning the.
blockade Of Santiago by Commodore
Schley. The witness said the vessels
were flying in column from six to eight
miles off shore at night they steamed
slowly back and forth in front Of the
harbor 800 yards apart They were SO
far out. the witness said, that it was
impossible to distinguished points on
shore or to determine where the shore
line met the water line.
Mr. Raynor called attention to the
fact that the log of the New Orleans,
placed the distance of that vessel
from the Moro at four and a half
miles, and the witness said this was
true;
Lieut. Commander Vim. H. Schuetze,
who was a member of the board of
navigators which prepared the official
chart of the positions of the vessels
engaged in the battle of July 3, said
he had not been satisfied with the re-
port.
"I protested, he said, against
the singing Of the report as being in
accurate, but was finally persuaded
to do so by the senoir member of the
board, Commander Wainwright, who
thought that was the best he could do
even if we stayed there until doom's
day and l signed it under protest.
Ny first objection was that the chart
wasoinaccurate. That the position of
the Iowa was plotted on this chart as
giving her too much speed. Another
objection I had was the initial position
the Brooklyn when the Spaniards
left the harbor I contended that the
Brooklyn's position was too close to
the mouth of the harbor: that she was
not in her regular position: she was
south of it,
Capt. Lemly: 81 want you to state
whether you saw the Texas?''
s'When I first saw the Texas she was
heading to the eastward Or north.
Soon afterward / noticed her again
and she was headed TO the westward
and apparently lying dead in the wa
ter. I called Capt. Evans attention
to the fact that she was in our way;
that she was lying dead in the water
and cautioned the captain that we
would probably run into her if we
kept on the way we were heading.
She was then on our port bow. We
were trying to get close into the har
Dor and steamed at first directly for
the mouth of the harbor. AS the
Spaniards turned to the westward we
turned in the same direction, and in
this move we were hindered by the
Texas
On cross examination Mr.. Raynor
questioned the witness in reference to
the official chart.
"Why did you not state This chart
is wrong, and I will not sign?' -
81 did,
"Then why did you sign?"
Because was persuaded by the
other witnesses of the board that that
was the best we could do and they
wanted to come to an agreement that
was a compromise. -
"Then really this chart was signed
for the purpose of coming to an agree
ment and not for the purpose Of show
ing any accurate results, was it?''
1.-The board was ordered to show ac-
curate results, but it was an absolute
impossibility to make chart of that
kind showing accurate results. There
was never a chart drawn of any battle
in the world that is correct. -
When the court re-convened after
luncheon Lieut.. Commander Scbeutze
said he had seen no evidence of dis
position on the part of any of Ger
vera's ships to ram any Of the Ameri-
can vessels.
By the court: "Was your position
during the battle of July 3rd such as
to enable you to observe clearly the
relative position and movements Of
the different ships?''
"No sir. l never observed the rela-
tive positions of all the ships on &C
count of the smoke and the attention
we were paying 70 our own ship in the
fight.