Evening star., 1901-10-08
IN DEFENSE OF SAMPSON
col. THOMPSON ISSUES AN ENPLANA-
TORY STATEMENT.
Declares the Admiral Never Approved
the Proof Of the Maciay
History.

| tti- RppCIl NJ lupiifSbh VI ~NSM AbA N
city. president OF the United States Naval
Academy Alumni Association. makes the
! following statement in connection with the
Schley inquiry:
Il am interested in the so-called Samp-
/ son-Schley controversy. / say 'so-called'
| because If il had not been for the politi-
| clans and unwise civilian friends there
would never have been any controversy
| between Sampson and Schley. After the
| battle of Santiago, Schley, in handsome
| manner. in his telegram OF July 10, ex-
| pressed to the Secretary OF the Navy what
was undoubtedly his own feeling and the
| general feeling of the feet, that the great
| est credit for the happy issue Of the battle
| of Santiago was due TO Sampson as COM
| mander-in-chief of the North Atlantic
| squadron.
Sampson on the other hand, while not
approving of Schley's conduct in Its en-
tirety, was yet so satisfied with his conduct
in the battle and the prominent part that
his ship bore that he urged upon the Sec
retary to disregard Schley's conduct prior
to June /, from which after all, no serious
harm had come and did his best to secure
his promotion.
There is one story which / am very anx-
ious should be truthfully presented to the
public After Maclay's book was published
Mr.. Maclay stated that his proofs had been
submitted to the commanding officers. IN
cluding Admiral Sampson, and that they
approved his statements. A reporter called
upon Admiral Sampson when he was i'll in
his bed and obtained from the admiral what
appeared to be a confirmation of this state
ment. The admiral was asked IL he had
seen and read the proofs of Maclay's book,
and he said. Yes but unfortunately he
was too Ill to go into the matter at any
length and explain everything, and so the
public was informed and today believes
that Admiral Sampson entirely approved
the statement that Schley was a coward
and a c1ftin which WA the piSf of MarlaN'9
charge against Schley.
II am in position to state the true facts,
and you may absolutely rely upon them as
the truth. The proofs were sent by Mr..
Maclay to Admiral Sampson with the re-
quest that they should be read and correct
ed. The admiral at the time not in
good health and did not wish to undertake
the labor, but his secretary pointed out that
the Maclay history was a standard one and
used at the Naval Academy a text book.
This volume brought the history down
through the period of the Spanish war and
it was desirable that there should be no in
accuracies in it.
THE admiral, therefore, consented to read
them, and he did correct a certain part of
them, but as soon as he arrived at the part
which contained the statement that Schley
was a coward and a caitiff he was very
much angered and said the statement was
one the author had no right to make: that
1t was unjust and unfair to speak of any
naval officer in such terms, and declined to
have anything further to do with the proofs.
His secretary. impressed with the great
desirability of having the statements OF
facts accurate and not believing that he
was in any way responsible for the state
ments of opinion, did, on his own account
compare the book with the records and
make on the margins number of correc-
tfons. AS these were in the same hand
writing as those made when Admiral Samp-
son was giving his personal attention to the
correction Mr. Maclay was perfectly justi-
fled in his statement. The order of the Sec
retary of the Navy forbidding naval officers
to make any statement for publication re-
garding this controversy, issued Immediate
ly after this interview, prevented ..ie above
correction being officially made
Fortunately, L am in position to learn
accurately the facts, and II gives me great
pleasure to make them public Just as il
gives me great pleasure to be able to note
that the statement that Admiral Schley
while blockadng Santiago, ran out at night
to distance of twenty or twenty-five miles.
thus leaving the port entirely open has
been proved to be untrue.
My interest in these matters, and I be-
neVe IL Is the interest of every good Amerf-
can, is to learn the truth, and to be able
to believe that our naval officers are the
high toned, manly, generous. courageous
men we have always believed them to be-
There is one other mater that has been
brought up in which accusations of care
lessness. to say the least. have been made
against the gallant Wainwright I'm connec-
tion with the chart of the battle of Santiago.
prepared and printed in the so-called ap-
companying the chart sees that there was
no misrepresentation as to what it was II
did not claim to be, and in the nature OF
things could not be- absolutely correct
I'm the first half hour of the fight while
the smoke of battle obscured all landmarks
and the excitement incident to the battle
was affecting every mind, how could men
determine accurately where they were at
each particular moment? At the best there
could only be, as there was a general dis
cussion between the navigators each one
putting down his ship where he thought il
ought to be, and where there were differ
ences of opinion the majority had to decide
as to which position was to be accented
and so the board reported. The chart in
question, which shows in a general way the
positions of the ships, is as accurate as in
the nature of things, We can make it, and
in any event is an approximation of the
truth. This description stands true TODAY.
and all the criticism of Wainwright and the
others is entirely unjust.
Il was at the recent yacht races and 7
nave learned how exceedingly difficult to
determine the position of a ship on the
water from one point of view Time and
time again people on the yacht with me
We're convinced that one or the other boat
was gaining, when the apparent gain or
loss was due to our own motion. With no
fixed standard to guide one, ii is very diff
cult to even approximate the truth With
TINS In mind, 1 readily understand the dif-
ference of opinion of the several officers
who, during the battle. observed the Brook
lyn from varying positions There is not
the least doubt but that each one report ed
the truth as he saw 1t. The exact truth
can be arrived at only by combining all the
points of view, or perhaps the exact truth
can now never be determined"