Evening star., 1901-11-05

dieating whether the projec;ile was moving
with a high velocity or a low velocity
points that tell at once, after experience.
70 character, meaning the size and mum
| per, the number of rounds that were fired
during the time, indicating their num-
pers-in this way alone 1 judged"
AS the result OF his observations Captain
Folser adds: Il considered on the
New Orleans that the batteries were of
| such small Importance that we directed the
sreater part OF our attention. perhaps all,
70 the Colon" 1t appears that other res-
sels did not fire at the batteries at all,
ana that the six-inch guns on the New
orleans. being of high power were used,
but that guns of like character on the other
| vessels could not be used the ranges being
TOO great. Nearly all OF the witnesses spoke
oi Two or three. or three or four, shells
/ 1alilng in the water in the neighborhood of
our snlps. and one or two passing over.
ADMIRAL Schiey, however. says there was
perhaps.
| 1t is shown by the testimony Of officers
VINO served on those vessels that subse
quently these same batteries were silenced
Withln Jew minutes by single ship
gong into reasonably close range. On one
occasion the Texas did this; on another the
New Orleans did the same thing
III the fire OF May 81 was intended to de-
stroy the Colon 1t was a total failure. II
! IL was intended as O. reconnaissance IL was
strated that If all the ships available had
| pcen taken into action the batteries could
| PROBABLY have been very speedily silenced,
| and the Colon, moored stem and stern.
| broadside to the entrance, In narrow
| channel, could have been destroyed with
Out damage TO any of the vessels of the
American fleet. and, further, that a second
vessel of the Viscaya class would perhaps
also have met like fate
Certain cautonary orders, some of them
confidential in their character, issued by
| do M ~
have been cited as forbidding the exposure of
vessels to the fire of batteries, and as jus
| tifying Commodore Schley's conduct OF the
so-called reconnaissance of May 81. AS
! sCming that the substance of these orders
was communicated to Commodore Schley
by Admiral Sampson at Key West on the
18th of May, 1898, ii is clear that they
have no application to the conditions exist
ing at Santiago on the 31st of May. Had
the batteries at Santiago been stronger than
they were the probability of destroying the
Colon was amply sufficient to Justify
serious effort to accomplish that object.
The action of the commodore in allowing
the Colon to lie in plain sight for two days
and a half without firing a shot in her di-
rection seems ineXplicable, in view of the
fact that the destruction of the vessels of
Cerveras fleet was the primary mission of
the flying squadron.
Specification No. s Not Established
Mr.. Hanna then referred to the eighth
specification of the precept concerning the
withdrawal Of the ships of the flying squad
ron from the vicinity of the harbor at San
tiago at night. or this he said: 1T does
not appear from the testimony adduced be-
fcre this court that the vessels of the fly
ing squadron were withdrawn from the en-
trance to Santiago harbor to a distance
at sea, and therefore the extent and char
acter of such withdrawal need not be dis
cussed."
The specification covering the character
OF the blockade and the evidence adduced
on that point, he said, he should not dis
cuss, for the reason that he did not con-
slider himself authority on those mat
ters. He reviewed the character of the
blockade, however, as shown in the evil
dence, and concluded that it was not near
enough to the shore at night to have pre-
vented the entrance or exit of deep-water
vessels from the harbor. He said that Ad-
mlral Schley, according to his recollection
was the only-Witness who had testified that
he could see the shore plainly at night
Mr.. Hanna in commenting the block
ade at Santiago spoke of the visit of Cap-
tain F'oiger to the flagship Brooklyn, on
which occasion he called to the attention
OF Commodore Schley the form of blockade
at Wei-Hai-Wei, which he had observed.
His suggestion" said Mr.. Hanna, was
nnent of one of the commanding officers
engaged in that blockade it was of doubt
full efficacy"
The BrooIxlyn's Loop.
Mr.. Hanna then referred to specification
No. Q, in relation to the turn of the Brook
lyn and the conduct of Admiral Schley
during the battle of July 3. He referred
to the position of the Brooklyn at the time
the battle began and it's proximity to the
Texas. He said that the turn of the Brook
lyn was really the only important feature
in the battle of July that the court was
required by the precept to investigate, and
al,
been given in relation to that battle which
So far as he could see, had no bearing on
the subject under discussion. He said that
the course taken by the Spanish vessels in
coming out of the harbor of Santiago on
the morning of the battle naturally caused
them to head toward the Brooklyn before
they got on their westward course. They
could not have come out of the harbor
without heading in that way. 1t was es-
tablished, he said, that there was no change
of direction after they headed for the west
ward. Some witnesses testified otherwise,
however.
wright and Admiral Taylor, who, he said,
We're close observers of the Spanish fleet
when it came out from the harbor Ad
mirai Taylor said that accqSding to his OBJ
servation there was no attempt on the part
of the Spanish vessels to ram any of the
vessels of the American squadron.
Speaking of the loop made by the Brook
lyn, Mr.. Hanna said that according to some
the southwark 1900 yards, and according
to others, from one to two miles, though
there were witnesses who testified to short
er distances. He quoted Captain Cook, who
said that when the turn was made the pos
sibility of a collision never entered his
head. He also referred to the testimony of
Lieutenant Hodgson in regard to the COLO
guy with Commodore Schley relating to the
danger Of collision Upon this question,
however, he said, the testimony of the
navigator of the Texas was the best. Lieu
tenant Commander Heilner had said that
on thinking the matter over since the bat-
tie he had concluded the Brooklyn had I
come within 100 or $50 yards of the Texas.
Delay to the Texas.
The chief engineer on board the Texas
had also testified that the starboard en-
gine had been reversed and he thought the |
port engine was also reversed.
There is strong testimony on this point |
from the engine room of the Texas" con- |
tinued Mr. Hanna, where the orders to |