The age-herald., 1901-10-08

could not repudiate the entire statement, and that he had not understood him to request that he should do more than deny it's verbal accuracy. He already had before writing his explicit denial told the admiral that he could not deny the whole story. He had given the newspaper re- porter authority originally to quote him as authority for the gist of the state ment.
 At this point MT. Rayner introduced as evidence the official report made by Cap tain Chadwick of his examination of the witness with regard to this colloquy, for the purpose, as he said, of showing dis crepancies between the statement made in that examination and the statement made now. This caused Captain Lemley to offer a statement made by Lieutenant Heilner on the same subject. but MT Rayner objected to this statement as not pertinent, and the court, after consulta- ton. sustained the objection.
 Other statements were put in as evil dence without objection, and Captain Lemley offered a letter from Captain Chadwick to the Secretary of the Navy in regard to an explanation contained in a letter from Commander Hodgson, which had just been read and offered as evil dence.
 MT. Rayner called attention to the fact that this letter contained an expression of opinion, whereupon Admiral Dewey said: We don't want it. We have not taken opinions here" Captain Lemley said that he only offer | ed these documents for the purpose of | making the records complete The court at this time adjourned for luncheon.
 The afternoon session of the court be- gan with a question put to Lieutenant | Commander Hodgson by MT. Hanna. He | asked why he had written his denial for l of he ha- | tween himself and Commodore Schley. Dewey Wants Facts. | The question was objected to, and Ad- | miral Dewey said: We have the facts of the letter written, and that Is all the court wants. We want facts-facts. Peo- pie are influenced by different kinds of things. We want the facts; draw out the facts.''
 MT. Hanna: All I want to find out is the occasion for writing this letter.
 Admiral Dewey: The court don't want that information; we don't need it.
 MT. Hanna then changed his question. and the witness said he had written 1t in response to a request from Admiral Schley. "He wanted me to write a de- nial of the controversy" he continued. T had previously written that I could not deny the statement. A letter followed asking for denial of the colloquy. I | ing that I had admitted the gist of the report"
 Have you anywhere denied the sub stantial accuracy of facts as set forth in the report of that colloquy?"
 "On the contrary I have admitted It."
 Continuing, the witness said that Com modore Schley had not said. as reported, that the Brooklyn was too near the Span iards.
 Objected to the Report. Commander Hodgson said he objected to the tone of the newspaper reports which had put him, junior officer, in the absurd position of holding controversy | with the commodore. Changing his line of examination, MT. | Hanna then asked: When the Brooklyn turned with port helm. did she blanket the fire of the Tex as? Did she go between the Texas and | the enemy?'
 "I do not think she did. I thought, however, she was going to do it.'' Had she turned the other way was there space enough for her to. have made such a turn without endangering the Texas?"
 Perfectly, perfectly clear enough space.''
 the northward and westward had she turned with starboard helm?"
 '.She would have gained a position of bout 600 or 700 yards nearer the Spanish | lines.
 Would that distance have been re- duced by reversing the port nearer the Spanish lines?"
 "If you turned the port engine. the tac- | tical diameter would have been schort- ened, but the speed of turning would have been reduced"
 Engine Was Not Reversed.
 'I understood you to say you suggested the revival of the starboard engine at the l time the turn was made, but that that was rejected by Commodore Schley after | consideration and discussion Are you clear that the starboard engine was not reversed?"
 T am very clear of that fact. No signal was made"
 Captain Lemley: Are you clear that the colloquy, or, as you call 1t, dialogue, as given by you today was between you you and some other person on board the Brooklyn?'
 There was no dialogue. There were three people interested In that conversa- tion. Commodore Schley. Captain Cook and myself participating in it.
 MT. Hanna then asked about the cruise from Cienfuegos to Santiago and in- quired how the fleet had gotten twenty five or thirty miles south of Santiago The reply was that the captain of the Brooklyn had given him (witness). the course, and that he (witness) had SUD- posed it was because of the supposition that the fleet might fall in with Cervera. He said the course pursued would not have taken the squadron to Santiago"
 Blockade at Night.
 Speaking of the blockade of Santiago,