The age-herald., 1901-08-31
Will Probably Be Retained on Seh|ey Court of Inquiry
 Despite the Protest
HE WRITES AN EXPLANATION
Tells War Department That He Did Not Criticise Admiral SchIey In an nterview-Schley's
 Counsel Objects.

S6JSSeos
 Washington, August 30.-Acting-Secre- tary of the Navy Hackett today made public the personal correspondence be- tween Rear Admiral Howison and him. self in relation to the fitness of the ad- miral to serve upon the court of inquiry, Admiral Howison having consented tha: his personal letter shall be given to the public,
 A copy of Rear Admiral Howison's let ter has been sent to Rear Admiral Schley, a part of which follows:
 When the news of our navy's success at Manila and again at Santiago reached Boston, the people there were not behind the rest of the Unitd States in giving honor and praise to the navy and to the commander-in-chief of the fleets The en- thusiasm of the population in praise and honor for the officers and men engaged at Santiago lasted for some time, until later when the troubles commenced as to where the credit and honor should go for the success of this engagement.
 ''It is no news to the navy to say of success go to the officer in chief com mand. Censure for failure also belongs to him.
 This newspaper in question contains a statement in which it is said that I made a comparison between Schley and Samp- son, unfavorable to Schley. The word re spected as used by the reporter, Is sell dom or never employed by navy men in comparing tn qualities possessed by of ficers and I am sure I could never have said this as he reports, nor said that schley had the reputation of being nerv> ous and hot-headed in the naval acae- emy.
 "One may say an officer stands high CT in his class if true; another may stand higher in scientific attainments, while another may be distinguished for eminent diplomatic and social qualities.
 Does not Remember.
 "I have no recollection of the gentle man representing the Boston Record, and I do not approve of his public statement as mine. I cannot say that I have not discussed with acquaintances matters published in the newspapers relating to our navys success as well as the unfor- tunate disputes so widely commented on. There are few or no persons in the navy or in our country who have not daily discussed these newspaper articles. Prom the papers 1t appears that Ad- miral Schley has strong doubts as to my fitness to fairly judge this case with Ad- mirals Dewey and Benham.
 "As it Is a case of grave importance to those concerned and to the country I am desirous of giving my little help to clear away the troubles.
 ''The duties of members of courts mar tial and courts of inquiry are not sought or desired by officers.
 While feel highly honored by the departments selection of myself for this duty it is anything but a pleasant task to sit in Judgment on brother officers.
 However, the honor of the selection nor unpleasantness of court duties do not enter into the reasons for my now writing to say to you personally three things:
 "1. To reassure you that I am not re- sponsible for and did not give out such an interview as is alleged in the dispat ches from Boston and stated in the newspapers to have beeps mentioned by Admiral Schley in a recent letter to the depart ment.
 "2. If however, the department feels that the cause of the navy and of justice will be better served by relieving me from duty on the court, am entirely ready to withdraw voluntarily, or to have the de- pertinent relieve me upon its own lnitia- tive.
 "3. On the other hand, if the depart ment, knowing all the circumstances, de- sires that should perform the duty, I .dn entirely ready to perform 1t, and can, upon my conscience and oath, do my duty as a member of the court without partial ity, as the law requires.
 Yours sincerely and respectfully,
 'H. l.. HOWISON
 Rear Admiral, United States Navy Hon. Frank W. Hackett, Washington, D. C."
 MT. Hackett's Reply.
 The following is MT. Hackett's reply:
 Washington. August 26, 1901. Dear Admiral: Your personal letter of the 24th deserves an immediate reply.
 You say substantially that there is no foundation for the statements attributed to you as having been set forth In an in terview, afterward published in the Bos- ton Record. and lately made the subject of a communication from Rear Admiral Schley to the department.
 "You evidently have read the corres- pondence between the admiral and the department as published last week in the newspap pers.
 "rhe department, let me assure you, has no purpose of relieving you of this duty It has implicit confidence in your sense of justice and fair-mindedness. Should the counsel for Rear Admiral Schley proceed to offer to the court ob- lection to you, it will be for the court itself to decide the question of your com potency to sit as a member.
 Were your letter official instead of being merely personal, I should refer 1t to be laid before the court. would like to know if you have any objection to my giving to the public your frank and manly letter, in the event that I shall deem 1t desirable to do so
 What you have said only confirms me in the belief that the department has