The evening times. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1895-1902, 1901-11-04

sr-rea.ha- Caataiu Sicsucc. I do not in
IpuG t0 imVrarh his TeratitE. but ] do
intend tu imp,agh MS Tey"A'cuon as 10
th.=a matters ] say h, Is entirely m.
taken. Do i- very material point i'm the
case It goes 60 show what Captain Sl---
! n.e Thought and said about the Spanish
fleet being I'm Santiago. and 10 N'rropo-
rates what Commodore Schley has igsu-
te# rn. that Captain Sig-ber told MN
/ that C,~yera was not there tymmg4ore
SuGiuE was not present when AT- Hare
and when The other side brought uq AR
S'ovgL to contradict Mr.. Hare. I made
mo- objection. tAIr. Seuyel aii not dl-
rrgtIy contradict Mr.. Hare. he simply
stated that he did not hear the CONVERSE
zion or remarks 90 which Mr. Hare JeS-
UfsdD ] never knew of this uUuyersa-
-iuu rht ON, between Captain S.ESn.r
and Mr.. Richards until about clock
last sunday morning and when these
gentlemen teloGraphed 90 me about H.
felt IL my duty 20 bring them mere anu
] let them state what the conversation with
Captain SigSbee was.
Mr.. Hanna then argued the question.
| saving that the situation was exactly the
reverse To- what it was the other day,
/ when Lieutenant Grant was upon the
| stand TO testify 10 the alleged wardroom
| conversation on board the Massachusetts,.
| lie said that Mr. Hare had been brought
| i'm and allowed TO testify before the Court
| made its ruling Had the Court preyi-
''tiSlN llIsi'.t' KS tAlllE MI iisilf tf7AA-
mony, he said. would have been inadmis-
sible.
The Courts Ruling.
The Court then took a recess. and upon
returning Admiral Dewey said
As the testimony Of this witness is not
considered by the Court as material to
the case. the objection is sustained. in
accordance with the Courts previous rul-
| ing"
The ruling of tie Court was plainly
surprise 20 the audience and Captain
L,mly was olat,5. NIr Richards was
| then excused. and the other newspaper
| correspondent who was TO give evidence
/ similar 10 that to which Mr. Richards
| was 10 present was not called.
Admiral SchI,y tnou went upon the
/ stand to correct his testimony
Tells OF Sigsbee's Anxiety.
! Admiral SchIey was fully an hour cor
reCtinE his testimony. Most OF the cor
/ rnctions were Of very little Importance.
They consisted chiefly In changes in the
1 phraseol0gv of mis- statements to the
Court Admiral Schlcy finally REQUIRED
/ % that section Of Captain Sigsbee's tes-
/ timony during which the captain stated
I than upon boarding the Brooklyn he talk
I cd with Commodore SchIey. when the lat
| ter had said that he had decided 10 go 20
! KC.- West
Admiral SchIsy-I did not say i- 10y
( conversation with Sigs5gc that we were
going To- Key West ] talked with him
about the subject Of coal. and in his
q talk with me De rn-t mo hc was com
harding vessel that was tenth OF
mile long ana that be- could not turn mis-
t engines over under laH tons Of coal lie
Was very anxious r0 get away. and said
that be wanted To- go 70 Key West /
never told him ] was going to Key West
/ tie Is urFrrltf.IE mistake there
BY Mr. Rayusr.
Q.-Had You made up your mind 10 go
/ A--No. / had not
Nj Perkor-It was only after the con
/ NerS5uon YOU had With him that YOU de-
Cidrd % 50 TO Key WeSr2
A.-Yes, and after talked with Sigsbee
! talked with Nuu,z the pilot That was
some time after ] talked with Sigshee.
Captain Slgsbes left my ship about $50
l or Gas that evening He was exceedingly
anxious 10 get away, because ne said the
sea was Increasing and that 10 was very
difficult for him o. float OF the harbOr IN
the afternoon
Now. In regard 70 the conversation
had with the admiral concerning FORTH
cations, ] recall that we talked about that
subject asked him II he thought the
enemy had H1-t tIria OF KTuDp guns He
replied that they probably aad both In
I relation 10 the testimony of Lieutenant
LemIy's Comment Resented.
captain t. IflI NOW. I NNIL IKE 10 Nt1-
! joct % this. but IL seems 90 me this falls
within the ruling Of the Court. as that
( ruling has been followed, and that this is
[ Objectionable.
lir. Rayucr-We can contradict q wit
ness here n We like. II is ridiculous to
I think that We cannot Let the admiral
/ proceed The statement he is going 10
/ make is entirely proper What the admi-
i raj wants 10 say concerning Lieutenant
/ EJys' testimony is new matter ] asked
the Court whether We had the right 10
I call Heg witnesses to contradict testi-
I mguF- l" Court said. Yes
The Court laddressug the judge advo-
catct-D1 you obiect2
Captain Lemly-NO. sir; 7 do not OBJ
lecL / simply wanted 10 call attention
90 ,hIs matter. ROys is the only witness
10 remain uucOutradiCted-
Mr. Rayner-That IS a great mistake
/ There are about fifty witnesses remaining
uucGutradicted. according TO my recoIIec-
[ tiou. DO not think that IL is "a proper
remark To- make.
Captain Lemly-WeI. you don't like it2
Mr Rayner-No, ] don't II is highly
Captain Lemly-If the Court please. I
am TO be corrected by the Court alone
and not by the counsel. which has been
I frequently attempted.
AT- EayusI-ILI remark is objection
u2nable because it is not fact Cap
tains and admiraIs. many Of them have
not been CDutrIuICted. The remark
/ means that Admiral SchIey has contra
/ oeted every person who has taken the
I stand II is highly improper.
The Court-The Court has no objection
20 tn, admiral proceeding.
Admiral SChIry--I merely want TO saw
IN connection with this testimony thar I
remember nothing Of the desire, gf LIEN
tenant Commander SDuthsTfHaG % coal
IN tAal the witness was mistaken. be-
. cause lt would have been impossible
Cross-eNamination by Captain LemIy.
I'm D.