The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-10-05

Raynor said the statement had been pre-
pared by Admiral Schley.
The witness also said that he knew that
the Brooklyn had eight-inch guns. but Mr..
Raynor SAID the al 1iral's computation
was not intended 10 cover that feature. His
only purpose was to make the showing Tor
five-inch guns, these being unmlstakaDly
the Brooklyn's.
Cross-examined on the dispatches carried
by the Iowa, Captain Rodgers was asked
If the Dear Schley" letter, dated at Key
West May 90 1888 written by Admiral
Sampson. in which the statement was
made that II am of the opinion that our
best chance of success I'm capturing the
enemy's ships will be TO hold Cienfuegos
and Havana" was included in these dis
no knowledge of what the envelopes con-
tained. While the examination on this
point was in progress Mr.. Raynor read the
letter including the following extract:
eff later il should develop that these
vessels are at Santiago, we could then as
semble off that port the ships best suited
Until we then receive more positive infor-
nation we shall continue to hold Havana
and Santiago"
MIR Ravnor remarked that he supposed
1t would be conceded that the word San
tiago," as given above. was mistake. and
that il should be "CienfuegOS. Captain
Lemly replied that he would make no such
concession and tilt followed between
counsel concerning the accuracy or govern
ment publications II closed with an un-
derstanding that the original document
In reply TO a question by Mr.. Raynor as
TO the condition of the weather from May
"a to 26 Captain Rodgers replied G,a that the the
sea was moderate. lie qualified this
statement by saying that for the smaller
vessels-the converted yachts-it was un-
comfortable
BROOKLYN AND TEXAS.
The court asked a number of questions
of Captain Rodgers, among others being
one as to whether the Brooklyn and the
Texas had been in danger of a collision on
July s. The witness replied that il there
had been any such danger he had not seen
the two ships at the time. He had seen
the two vessels early in the engagement,
but they were then about half mile apart.
Later he was called below, and IL there had
been such danger it was at that time.
After this point was elaborated the ques-
tiOns and answers were as follows:
Odd Commodore Schley open in your
presence the package you handed him at
Cienfue gos?
Odd he make any comments 10 you
regarding these dispatches
A.-NOne that l recall. He discussed ct
stated the conditions existing there The
conversation was general
Captain Rodgers was excused and Judge
Advocate Lemly. after stating that Lieut..
Commander AlDOn @. HOdgsOn would be
the next witness, pending his appearance,
again brought up the question as 10 whether
the word ''Sartiago" had been substituted
by mistake for the work "Cienfuegos" in
The letter written by Admiral Sampson 10
Commodore Schley on May 20 beginning
Dear Schley" Captain Lemly said:
The word was originally Santiago as
IL is printed in the Senate document. The
difference appears 10 be a matter OF pune
tuatiOn. and in the letter as il apDears
copied in Admiral Sampsons ; copy book
il reads. Until We then receive more posi-
tive information we shall continue TO hold
Havana and Santiago whereas. as printed
as an appendix 10 Rear Admiral Schley's
letter 10 the Senate Ii is. Until We. then.
receive more positive information We shall
continue 10 hold Havana and Santiago >
And then in the letter as printed refers
back 10 other matters relating 10 Santiago.
and the punctuation would appear 10 give
1t the meaning OF therefore-'until we there
CONTINUED on PAGE 6. col. o.