The St. Louis Republic. [volume] (St. Louis, Mo.) 1888-1919, 1901-08-31
Repudiates Newspaper Interview
in Which He Was Quoted
as Criticising Schley.
READY TO Perform HIS DUTY.
Will Serve if the Department De
sires Him to Do So, AL
though He Is Not Seek
ing Such Service.

Washington. Aug. a.-Rear Admiral How
ison has replied to the newspaper comment
concerning his qualifications as a member
OF the Schley Court of Inquiry. In a long
personal letter to Acting Secretary Of the
Navy Hackett the Rear Admiral states that
he never criticised the actions Of Rear Ad-
miral schley, nor Of any other navy official.
IN connection with the battle of Santiago.
and That the newspaper interviews with him
to that effect are not correct.
The correspondence between the Rear Ad-
miral and the Secretary OF the Navy was
made public to-day. Rear Admiral Howl
son states that he had friendly relations
with the Boston newspaper men. and proba-
bly, talked OF the Santiago affair, but that
he did not and could not have used the Ian
guage credited to him. He says that he will
retire from the Court of Inquiry II the Navy
Department wishes IL. or will remain as a
member II his services are required In his
letter to Acting Secretary Hackett the Rear
Admiral says:
Prom the papers IL appears that Ad-
miral Schley has strong doubts as to my
fitness to fairly judge this case with Ad-
mirals Dewey and Benham- As II Is a case
Of grave importance to those concerned and
to the country. / am DESTROYS of giving my
little help TO clear away the troubles. TIL
duties OF members Of cOurts-martiai and
courts Of inquiry are not sought or desired
by officers. While l feel highly honored by
the departments selection Of myself for this
duty. 1t Is anything but a pleasant task to
sit In judgment on brother officers.
Three Plain Propositions.
However. the honor of the selection nor
the unpleasantness OF court duties do not
enter into the reasons for my now writing
to say 10 you, personally, three things. viz
"Ffrst-To reassure you that l am not
responsible for and did not give out such
an interview. such as is alleged in the dis
patch from Boston, and as stated in the
newspapers TO have been mentioned by Ad-
miral Schley IN a recent letter TO the de-
partment.
that the cause of the navy and OF justice
will be better served by relieving me from
duty on the court. l am entirely ready TO
withdraw voluntarily. or to have the de-
partment relieve me upon its own initia-
'"Third-If. on the other hand. the depart
sires that l should perform the duty. i am
entirely ready to perform il, and can, upon
my conscience and OATH, do ry duty as 4
member OF the court without partially As
Will Not he Relieved.
Acting Secretary Of the Navy Hackett. re-
THE department. let me assure you. has |
no purpose of relieving you Of this duty.
IT has implicit confidence in your sense Of
and fair-mindedness.
Should the. counsel for Rear Admiral
Schley proceed to offer to the court Obiec- !
tion to you. 1t will be for the court itself to
as a member"
sCHLEY WITNESS LOCATED.
Washington, Aug. @.-The Navy Depart |
ment has succeeded by means Of its notices |
VI she sns sasss of yGss usssf L G IL G ,asrV WING x .as
the man at the wheel on the Texas in the |
battle of Santiago.
captain Lemly. the Judge Advocate Of
the Schley Court Of Inquiry. to-day received |
a telephone message from a resident of this |
city giving him Glaeson's address in the |
made public.
Captain Lemly's Preparation.
Captain Lemley. the Judge Advocate Of
the court, Is laying the foundation for the
Ing with those officers who will be sum
moned as Government Witnessed He was
m consultation to-day with Commander
Richard Wainwright. SUPERINTENDENT OF the
Naval Academy. who commanded the Glou-
cester in the battle of Santiago. and with
c; H. Harlow. who was execu-
during battle. have been the SUBJ
ject of SO much controversy.
The Navy Department has not yet heard.
either officially or unoficiallv from Captain
James H. Forsyth. regarding the alleged
Interview published recentlv. in which he is
quoted as commenting on the Sampson
Sch1ey's COunsel Dissatisfied.
Admiral Schley's counsel is entirely dis
satisfied with the position OF Admiral Howl
son. as disclosed In his letter to Acting Sec
-etary Hackett. made public to-day.
Tn lawyers hold that II is not q compre-
Denial OF the statements attributed
70 Admiral Howfson, nor. they say. does 1t
sufficiently the Admirai's freedom |
rom bias. 1t is probable they will set
these objections In a letter to the Act
ng Secretary Of the Navy.