The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1901-09-28

"
Sented from Rear Admiral Sampson ask
ing to be allowed, to be represented in the
court by counsel, but the court refused
to grant the request on the ground that
the court does not at this time regard
you as party to the case"
The principal witnesses of the day were
Lieut. John Hood, who commanded the
dispatch boat The Hawk, during the
Spanish war, and Capt Bowman H Nc
Gala, who was in command of the Mar
blehead. The testimony of both these
otncers dealt with the delivery of dis
patches from Admiral Sampson to Com
modore Schley and both related CONVEX
sattons with the latter Capt McCaua
gave in detail his part in arranging a
code OF signals with the Cuban in
surgents, and his communications with
item near Cienfuegos on May "a, 1898,
when it was learned definitely that Ger
vera's fleet was not in the harbor there.
He said that Capt Chadwick, who was
Admiral SIMPSONS chief of staff, was
the only person at Key West to whom he
had communicated the signal CODE
Capt. McCalla expressed the opinion
that coaling was feasible off Santiago at
the time Schley began his retrograde
movement.
PROMPT TO THE HOUR.
AS usual, Admiral Dewey lost no time
today in bringing the Schley court of
inquiry to order, and as usual the counsel
on both sides of the case were in their
seats and prepared to proceed promptly
with the business before the court In
deed Capt. LemIy and Mr.. Hanna the
navy departments representatives, had
been in the court room for an hour or
more preparing the details for the days
work, They consider the present stage
OF the proceedings an important one re-
qulring the most careful attention Capt
Lemly says he will be able to conclude
the government side of the case by the
close of next week if no unforeseen con-
tlngency arises to cause delay. He says
he will have about fifteen or twenty more
witnesses to introduce.
One of the most regular attendants
upon the court is William H. Stayton,
the attorney who is understood to be pre-
pared to represent other naval officers
than Admiral Sch1ey. He sits outside the
rail and does not in any way participate in
the proceedings. He said yesterday that
so long as Admiral Sampson is kept out
OF the case he will have nothing to say.
Ioday's session began with the recall
OF Capt. Wise to make verbal changes in
the official copy of his testimony. He
altered his previous statement concern
ing the order of the navy department of
May ~, 1888, in which he was directed to
inform every vessel off Santiago that
the flying squadron is off Cienfuegos,"
saying that he desired to correct his re-
sponse to the courts question as to why
TINS order was not carried out, by stat
ing that it had been carried out.
The flying squadron was ordered to
proceed with all possible dispatch" he
said and added "I did not desire to in
form the commodore of the flying
squadron OF his own movements The
order was to inform commanders of the
movements of the flying squA
The court then asked: Did you direct
Capt. Sigsbee to give Commodore Sch!ey
the information contained in the dispatch
from the navy department regarding the
whereabouts of the Spanish f1eet?'
ri did not
HARBER'S TESTIMONY IMPEACHED.
Lieut.. Spencer S. Wood, who com
manded the dispatch boat Dupont during
the Spanish war, was then called and
continued his testimony, begun yester-
day. Mr. Rayner resumed his cross.
examination. The witness said that
While off Cienfuegos he had been on
picket duty two miles from shore on the
night of May % and had been instructed
to signal the squadron with two red
lights in case the enemy's torpedo boats
came out of the harbor
Mr.. Rayner then read from the testi-
mony Of Capt Harber, of the Texas.
saying that there had been no picket
vessels within the line of the fleet off
Cienfuegos. The witness said that the
statement was wrong.
Capt. Lemly said Capt Harber had
testified that there were no pickets, 80
far as he could recall" to which Mr.
Rayner responded: 1--WE are not i'm
peaching Capt Harber's veracity. We
are impeaching his recollection, not his
integrity
Mr.. Rayner-Capt Harder has stated
that there were no picket boats at Glen
fuegos. He was wrong, was he not?
He was, replied the witness. AS
have seen since, the commander-in-chief
also reported the Dupont was not there
[ have written the department I was
there Other people forgot about it, too
You are trying now to justify Capt.
Harber's want of recollection by Stating
that the eommander-in-chief wrote a let
ter that there were no picket boats
there
HE did not mention their presence,
and 1 corrected it,
DO you recollect any statement made
by the commander-in-chief when he had
e picket boat within the picket line that
he had arranged signal from the picket
boat to the flagship.''
OMISSION IN REPORT.
'He did not mention any, and 1 have
letter on file in the department calling
attention to the omission in that re-
port
II call your attention to the report of
the commander-in-chief, in which he
states, the line of blockade, ETC.
Il wish to bring it out that the Du-
pont was inside the line and that was
the report L made to the department. I
still stand on the point that he is not
bringing out where the torpedo boat
was
You are perfectly right about that.
but you are not asked in reference to
any criticism you may have made upon
the report of the commander-in-chief
The question is this: Capt. Harber has
definitely stated that there was no picket
boat inside the line at Cienfuegos. You
say there was and that the Dupont was
one of those boats.''
I was inside the line, inside the Cas-
tine said Lieut.. Woods.
By the Court-Could you see the Tex
as from the Dupont during the nights
of May % and May %?
mo, SIR