The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1901-10-11

/ agreed with his commanding officer. The
| witness replied: 'As a fleet or squadron
| 1 could not agree that they moved closer
to the shore at night. I have an in
distinct recollection that the New Or
leans, the first evening, was lying a lit
/ tie further off shore than the Brooklyn.
! When the Brooklyn took up her course
| east, the New Orleans had to go in
| probably a quarter or possibly a half
! mile to get her position in rear of the
| Brooklyn, but it was no more than that
! 1t may have been that that gave the
| captain or commanding officer the i'm
| preston that we were closer in at night"
Mr.. Rayner called attention to the fact
| that the log of the New Orleans placed
| the distance of that vessel from the Nor
70 at four and a half miles, and the wit
ness said this was true.
Lieut.. Leiper said in reply to questions
! that his estimate of the distance out
was entirely due to visual observation.
ACTION OF MAY 81.
Asked whether he agreed with Capt.
| Folger in stating that the reconnaissance
| OF May 81, when the Colon was bonn
/ barded, was a success in developing the
| strength and number of the shore bat
! teries, witness replied that he thought it
| had been a success to that extent, but
| he could not agree with Capt. Folger in
| all that he had said He found that the
| fire of the batteries was slow. He also
found that the greatest caliber probably
was a siX-ineh gun on the Zocapa bat
terry; that there appeared to be ony two
or three guns there not of that calloer;
that on the battery east of the MORO
there appeared to be four or i've guns
fired and from the volume of smoke
and the range attained it appeared to
me that they were light guns, less than
six-inch caliber.
In reply to Capt. Lemly on redirect eX-
animation, Lieut.. Leiper said that the
distance of the blockading vessels from
the entrance of Santiago harbor was
about eight miles at the point where the
vessel turned at night.
The judge advocate asked: "What, re-
ally, as a matter of fact, was developed
by the affair of May 81 as to the strength
or weakness of gunS?"
"As compared with the strength of the
ships of the squadron, or as compared
with the strength of the guns of any
ship in the squadron, any of the battle
ships, the Brooklyn, New Orleans or the
Marblehead, the batteries were weak"
Lieut.. Leiper was then excused, and
Lieut.. Bristol called for the purpose of
correcting his testimony of yesterday.
While Lieut. Bristol was on the stand,
Mr.. Rayner read to him reports from
Capt r. D. Evans, Capt. Henry Glass
and Lieutenants Wainwright and Kellogg,
dated in 1895, saying that the stadimeter,
whose accuracy he had discredited, was
reliable within it's range. Judge Advo-
cate Lemly then asked him:
Does what you have heard read from
these officers in 1895, and which do not
appear to have been based on actual
experience in action, change your views
formulated on your practice with the
stadimeter and in action?"
Witness replied: 'TheSe do not change
my idea of the stadimeter. The stadi-
meter is an instrument that is accurate
at short ranges, as 1 stated before, but
becomes inaccurate at higher ranges.
In action it has never been tried before
that l know of I formed my opinion
of the stadimeter before we used it in
action-in fact after a very long person.
al use-and knowing these errors of the
instrument when used under ordinary
circumstances, I believe that observa-
lions taken in the heat of battle, with
all the smoke of battle, are still mac
curate."
REPORT WAS INACCURATE.
Lieut. Commander William H. Schuetze,
who as lieutenant was the navigator of
the battleship Iowa during the summer
of 1898, and who is now superintendent Of
compasseS in the navy department, was
the next witness. He was member of
the board of navigation which prepared
the official chart of the positions of the
vessels engaged on both sides in the bat
tie of July 8, and Judge Advocate Lemly
asked him concerning the report made
by that board which accompanied the
chart Witness said he had not been sat
iSfied with the report.
Il protested he said, against signing
the report, as being inaccurate, but 1
was finally persuaded to do so by the
har nj the hoard Commander
Wainwright, who thought that was the
best we could do, even if We stayed
there until doomsday, and I signed it
under protest. My first objection was
that the chart was inaccurate. That the
position of the Iowa, as plotted on his
chart, gave her too much speed. In order
to keep the Iowa in relative position to
the other ships for certain distances she
approximately appeared to be making
eighteen knots, when she was making
nine to ten. Another objection l had
was the initial position of the Brooklyn
when the. Spaniards left the harbor. L
contended that the Brooklyns position
was too close to the mouth of the har-
Dor; that she was not in her regular po-
stion; that she was south of it. L based
! that opinion upon the fact that when L
first discovered the Spaniards coming out
of the harbor I looked over toward the
other ships on our left, and the Brooklyn
was very nearly abeam of the Iowa.
The Iowa was heading north, directly
into the harbor''
Commander Schuetze was asked in re-
gard to his observations of the Brooklyn
in the battle of July g. He replied: Il
saw the Brooklyn at the beginning of the
action about port abeam of the Iowa.
| [ saw her some minutes afterward, when
| she appeared to be headed al little to
the eastward of north 1t is difficult to
oil she nearly brOa0-
| side on. Afterwards I saw her
LEADING TO THE EASTWARD,
about due east, should say. That is
| the last L saw of her.
Capt Lemly-f want you to state
whether you saw the Texas about this
time? How she was located relative to
| the Brooklyn? Did you notice anything
! particularly as to the speed of maneuver-
| ing of the Texas?
''When I first saw the Texas she was
| heading to the eastward of north. Soon
| afterwards I noticed her again and she
| was headed to the westward and appar-
emily lying dead in the water. 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 he would probably run into
! her if we kept on the way we were head
| ing. She was then on our port bow. We
| were trying to get close into the harbor
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 maneuver we
were hindered by the Texas
Capt. Lemly-It is in evidence here
that the Brooklyn crossed the bow of
the Texas. Have you any personal
knowledge of that?
mo SIR