The age-herald., 1901-09-11

i ming tomorrow, the nation will for sev- I eral weeks, certainly not less than eight be required to pay attention to this in- vestigation. Even should the time named prove shorter than is required for full l inquiry Into this cause it will not be un- reasonable. The main events which will come before it for consideration occurred more than three years ago. The contro- yersy which 1t is expected to settle has I waged unlnterruptedly for more than l three years, so that should even three months be required for its final settle ment the time will not be excessive; nor will it be wasted, for many considera- tions demand that this controversy be settled and disposed of forever. Chief among these considerations is the fact that, although three years and more | have elapsed since the battle of July 3, I no officer who participated in that go- rious victory has been rewarded for the work he did that day. What advance ments there may have been in the rank of those officers have resulted from pure l iy natural causes; the services rendered | in the annihilaition of Spain as sea power and in the destruction of the last l vestge of her power on this hemisphere 1 have gone unrewarded In the case of l Captain Clark, who raced the Oregon l from San Francisco to Key West, pun ishment has been measured out, for | that officer Is lower in rank today than he would have been had not he and his 1 gallant ship covered themselves with | glory In that memorable trip and in the subsequent battle. This has been, of course a source of much injustice to l many brave and deserving officers. But I should the court of inquiry make It's in- vestigation full, its findings clear, hts yer dict positive, all the impedlments will be swept away, and during the next ses- 1 sion the long-delayed rewards may be l bestowed upon the men who crushed l Cervera and sent the flower of the Span- ish navy onto the rocks about Santiago. It is cause for congratulation that this l result seems so sure of speedy attain ment. Ever since the first week after the battle of July the country has been | engaged In discussing and debating the | question:: Who was In command of the | American forces during the sea fight off Santiago? That question has resulted in innumerable scandals; it has divided the navy into factions; disturbed the de- Alterations of Congress on numerous oc- casions, and impeded the course of that
 justice which all nations delight in showing to their brave and gallant men l of arms.
 The Cause of the Trouble.
 When the first dispatch came announc- ing the victory over Cervera's fleet the country rang with praise for the men who served this nation so well. Within day or so 1t became known that that dispatch was sent by man who, al- | though absent and not participating in | the contest, arrogated unto himself the credit for the victory. The friends of Admiral Schley have always contended 1 that the Schley-Sampson controversy would never have been born had 1t not been for the bombastic dispatch herald ing the victory-a dispatch which, 1t now appears, bore the name of Admiral
 Sampson as it's author. but which was not written by him nor seen by him be-
 fore 1t was transmitted to the Navy De- pertinent.
 The news of the actual battle, fast fol- lowing this dispatch, caused a revulsion
 in public sentiment. The people almost
 instantly contrasted the rather seif-con-
 scious dispatch signed by Admiral Samp-
 son with the fact that that officer was not in the fight; that the real commander during the actual combat was Rear Ad- miral Schley, who, with becoming mod esty, was content to accept the victory as being great enough to give "glory for all" and who unhesltatingly gave the major portion of his praise for the achievement to "the men behind the | guns" From the moment when the I truth became known dates the contro-
  victory neither Admiral Sampson or his
 riends have been willing to recede from their first position. Rather have they I reiterated their first claim, as is evi- denced by the futile attempts which have been made to promote Sampson over the head of Schley.
 | At the battle of St, Vincent, Sir John Jervis, the commander-in-chief of the I English forces, was absent The battle was fought and won by the immortal l Nelson. When Jervis returned to the 1 fleet he threw his arms about Nelsons neck and, with tears streaming down his cheeks, thanked Nelson for his glo- rious work The sequel was that Nell son got full credit for the victory.
 Where Sampson Erred.
 | How easy it would have been for Ad- l miral Sampson to have shown a similar ] spirit. At the time the battle of July a began Sampson was absent under the or ders of the department. He did not at any time return to a position where he could take part In the fighting, or re- sume command of the American fleet until after the battle, which moved con staNly westward, was ended at that par ticular point The spirit of justice and | fairness which all officers are supposed | to exhibit toward their brother officers. | should, under all the circumstances, have | dictated that Admiral Sampson treat | Commodore Schley as Jervis did Nelson. | Had he done so and said in his dispatch | that the battle was fought and won by | the second in command the Schley- | Sampson controversy would never have | been heard of. The one question Involved | in that controversy Is not the mere tech- | nical question of who was in command; | the vital issue Is: By whom was the | battle fought and won? Had the credit | been given whefc 1t belonged In the first l place Admiral Sampson would have ob- | tained, without delay and without oppo- | sition, the reward that was his due as | the commander-in-chiefo of the American | forces; Commodore Schley would long ago have been promoted on account of having been the victorious captain in the greatest sea fight of modern times all the officers of the American fleet would have been given their just re- wards, and the Sehley-Sampson contro- yersy would never have been heard of for the good and sufficient reason that the cause for that controversy would never have existed.
 But the attempt of one man to gain unearned hero's laures was one of those stupendous errors of judgment for which no occasion existed, which was commit
 Of tha r.. t16