The Savannah morning news., 1901-09-13


doWlson had been heard from.
Judge Advocate Lemly maintained
mat Admiral Howison could make
statement if he xsssired, either before
or after the arguments.
He Makes His Defense.
Admiral Howison settled the mat
ter, however, by reaching forward for
MS cap and whispering to Admiral
Dewey. The latter then announced
that Admiral Howison would make his
response at once. Thereupon Admiral
Howison withdrew to the private
apartments in the rear and the court
took an informal recess.
When the court reconvened Admiral
Howison presented his reply, which
was read by Judge Advocate Lemly,
as follows:
Mr.. President and Gentlemen: In
reply to the objection to me as a mem
Der Of this court, l submit a copy Of
my personal letter to the Hon. Frank
w. Hackett, which has been made
Public by the Navy Department.
Mr.. Frost, l think. is answered in
this letter above referred to.
Mr.. Spon's statement is one 1 can
not father. / positively do not re-
member his face at all. Mr.. Frost's
lace is familiar, although l have not
seen him for two years or more, and
Jar. Spon, by his statement, only last
October.
blr. Nichols did call at my house
az fonkers, on very hot day, on his
o:sn business. He would not take no
admittance' for an answer and during
MS stay he did discuss with me sew
eral navy matters, among which was
the Sampson-Schley much talked-of
affair. Our talk was short as / de-
sired him to leave me in peace
Il desire to say that 1 am, as you
know, here to obey the orders of the
department to report to you for duty
as member of this court; it is not
optional with me TO obey or not obey
these orders. My commission requires
obedience.
These orders were not sought by
me, nor are they agreeable ones, but l
have been taught obedience to all law
full orders by my long service in the
navy.
Il do not propose to enter into the
subject of my private discussions. 1
do not wish to recall for the informa-
ton of the public what has been said
to me by acquaintance; in fact, 1t
would be a difficult task to perform.
Private utterances are not long re-
tanned, particularly when there is no
personal interest in the matters under
discussion.
Il sincerely hope that during the ex-
amina ton of my eligibility for men,
bership, should there be any doubtful
points in the minds of the unobjected
to members of this court, that all such
points be decided in favor of Admiral
Schley, who is the one most particular
ly concerned in the investigation to
follow. l will accept my detachment as
1 have my orders for this duty, as an
officer should.
II have no personal feelings and no
personal interests in the matters to
come before the court, except the in
terests 1 have for the good of the SER
vice. 1 have great faith in the impair
TALLY and justice of naval officers
serving on courts and sincerely hope
that the results finally obtained may
be satisfactory to our navy and TO our
country"
Assistant Judge Advocate Hanna,
as further part of the Admirars re-
ply, read his letter of explanation to
Assistant Secretary Hackett, made
public some days ago.
Rayner Is Very Persistent.
Mr. Rayner asked permission to in
terrogate Admiral Howison. The court
granted permission and the examina-
ton proved to be one of the most in
teresting features of the days pro-
ceedings. Mr.. Rayner pressed his
questions persistently, but the Admiral
did not at any time compromise in his
contention that he was competent to
sit as a judge in this inquiry.
Did you say to Mr.. Frost that
Sampson deserved a good deal of
credit for the victory at Santiago?"
Mr. Rayner asked of the Admiral.
May be 1 did," replied Admiral
Howison HE was commander-in
chief of the fleet and I probably said
that
You say you do not recollect Spon's
face Does not his statement recall
to your mind the questions to which
he testified?"
mot at ALL" was the reply. Contin-
uing, Howison said that he could not
voluntarily present his withdrawal to
the court.
Nor did he think that the fact that
he considered Sampson commandment
chief incapacitated him as a member
of the court.
Mr.. Rayner: "Now, you say just
now that you have in conversations
substantially admitted that the credit
of the battle of Santiago was due to
the commander-in- chief, and if Samp-
son was the commander-in-ch ief-if
that comes under any of the specifica-
is incidentally or primarily or collat-
orally involved-have not you made up
your mind on a very important ques-
ton that is to come before you now?"
Rear Admiral Howison mo, sir"
Mr.. Rayner: Then, why not?"
Rear Admiral Howison: "An officer
can clear up his mind, l honestly be-
lieve, and judge from the testimony
that is given before him, without re-
gard to what he may have taken from
newspaper reports. or from other re-
ports that have gone before"
The Judge Advocate: May l ask
what feature of the precept is referred
to with regard to winning the battle
| of Santiago?"
Mr.. Rayner: "It is involved in three
of the specifications. The first specif-
cation directs the court to inquire into
| his conduct in connection with the
events of the Santiago campaign. Now,
| If the conduct of Admiral Schley at the
battle of Santiago Is not an event in
connection with the Santiago campaign,
1 would like to know what it is"
| The Judge Advocate: THE conduct
| of Admiral Schley is in question, not
| only at the battle of Santiago, but in
| the whole Santiago campaign. But |
may as we'll say here, Mr.. President,
| and members of the court, that the
| question of Admiral SIMPSONS conduct
upon those occasions is not before this
court in any way. This is not a COM
| narrative question, as to whether some