The St. Louis Republic. [volume] (St. Louis, Mo.) 1888-1919, 1901-09-13
FIRST DAY OF NAVAL
INQUIRY DEVELOPS
IMMEDIATE INTEREST
Continued From Page One.

standing that it should be published. there
was no injunction of secrecy. Publications
had begun to appear concerning the credit
for the victory. This had been referred 10
during witness's visit 10 Admiral Howison.
and in reply the Admiral stated, so the
witness testified. that Sampson was entitled
to the credit of the victory at Santiago.
Admiral Eowison. the witness testified,
described the duties which had devolved on
Sampson: how vessels had been placed off
the entrance of the harbor to guard against
the escape of the Spanish fleet. The wit
ness said Admiral Howison stated that IL
the American fleet had been defeated, Ad-
lniral Sampson would have been asked why
it had occurred. Mr.. Frost said he had sug
gested that the public seemed disposed to
give the credit to Schley. In response, he
testified, Admiral HGwison went on to say
that SIMPSONS standing as an officer and
as man was greatly superior to that of
Sch1ey.
What he said" pursued the witness. 'n-
clined me to the belief that he had no use
or Admiral Schley.'
The witness also gave in detail the cir
'umstances leading up to the publication.
IN cross-eXamination. he was shown the
RECEIPT. and was asked by Solicitor Hanna
Admiral Howison had expressed an
opinion on the points In the precept. The
witness thought he had not, as many
points in the precept were not involved in
the conversation The witness adhered
strictly to his first statement. On redirect
examination. Mr.. Raynor asked: What
was Admiral Howison's manner during his
conversation with your?
He spoke OF Schley in what would call
a sneering manner" replied the witness.
SAID SCHLEY SHOULD
HAVE BEEN COURT-MARTIALEE.
There had been no announcement of the
names of witnesses who would be intro
duced to substantiate Mr.. Frosts testimony
as to Admiral Howison's attitude toward
Admiral Schley, and considerable interest
was manifested when the next witness.
William f. Spon. Of the firm of Spon &
Chamberlain. booksellers and publishers in
New York and London, made his appear
ance.
Mr. Spon testified that he had been pas
senger on the steamer Minneapolis, which
had sailed from London for New York on
October II. 1900, and that Admiral Huwison
had been also a passenger on the same ves-
sci on this voyage. The witness related that
one day. in the course of the voyage, the
Sampson-Schley controversy came up and
one gentleman expressed himself as favor
able to Admiral Sampson. Mr.. Spon had TAX
Ell the opposite side. and in his effort to
show that Admiral Sampson was not Il fit
man for that position, had remarked that
the use Of smokeless powder.
Continuing. Mr.. Spon said that Admiral
Howison came within hearing at this point
and. walking up to the group. said:
II correct you: this is not 80. You men
do not know What you are talking about.
You don't know anything about IT. Samp-
son is very much respected and looked UP
to. especially by the younger members Of
the navy
Continuing. the witness said that some
colloquy had followed after which Ad-
miral Howison had said:
Anyhow, Schley should have been court
martiaied He. was the main cause of ali
this controversy In the newspapers"
Mr.. Spon added that Admiral Howison
had seemed much excited during his con-
versation. and that the other members of
the party had listened in silence to what
he had to say.
From his whole manner" the witness
went on, II infer that he was a violent
partisan of Sampson and correspendingly
prejudiced against Schley. He was not con-
tent to correct me as to Admiral Sampson
but seemed willing to say bitter things. al
most vindictively. against Admiral
Schiey''
ACCUSED SCHLEY OF
DISOBEYING ORDERS.
Mr.. spon was Immediately succeeded by
Foster Nichols of Yonkers n. Y. which is
Admiral Howison's place of residence Mr..
Nichols is interested in naval publications
and in this capacity called upon Admiral
Howfson July last for the purpose of Sc
curing from him notes for biography of
the Admiral. He stated that the day on
which the call was made was very hot. and
that on this account the Admiral had asked
TO be excused from granting An interview
Mr.. Nichols said that after this conyersa-
tion he had produced copy of the work
which his house was getting out. contain
ing sketches of the leaders in the Spanish
American War and containing pictures of
Sampson and Schley.
The witness said that. at the sight of
Schiey's picture. Howison said Schley had
no business In the navy. and added that il
Schley were in the English navy he would
have been put out for less cause than
there is in his case
Il asked" the witness said, the reason
why Schley should have been put out. Ad-
miral Howison replied: For disobedience of
orders l asked why. If he disobeyed Or
ders. he was permitted to remain. The
Admiral replied: Because he gave the ex-
cuse that he had to go to Porto Rico to
coal; yet everybody knows that coalng at
sea Is possible .
The witness said that he had expressed
surprise 1t Admiral Howison's attitude |
and that, in reply. the Admiral had said: |
You would not be surprised If you were in |
touch with the sentiment among naval Of
f1cers.''
Witness said that, in response to an In
quiry from himself. Admiral -Howison had