The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1901-11-01
SCHLEYS OPPONENTS
HAVE INNING IN COURT

without saying q word or two uDon
that point If this case has IN any
manner approached that of a prOseCu-
ton. r. has been due TO the action of
the applicant and his counsel. Out Of
g=L erOus consider2 ton to the applicant
we have allowed every technical rule
of the law 10 be invoked in his in
terest. That is generosity. That is
not prosecution. Everything that the
law has devised to screen and protect
and defend a man who is under any
sort Of a charge has been allowed to
come in before this court of inquiry.
That was in favor OF the applicant,
not against him.
Rights of Naval court.
"A naval court of inquiry has the
absolute right to ask any questions
which il may chosse of anybody and
in any manner in which it chooses
TO prosecute its inquiry IL
viii not 10 To lay down these
technical rules as absolutely binding.
If the court pleases to adhere to them.
well and good. we do not desire in
our proceedings here, when the apph-
cant is represented by able and skilled
counsel, to have the stigma of prose
cutor placed upon the judge advocate
and his associate. That IS outrageous
and IN unWarranted word
Replying, Mr.. EayuOr said that he
had never referred to the inquiry as
a prosecution, but said that he had
referred to il as a trial, and so con-
sidered it. He also refused to cOnCede
that any special generosity had been
displayed in the case.
Captain Parker called the attention
of the court to the naval regulations
for 1900 in which the word 'prOSecu-
5e in 1rF1Fsa4firr
of inquiry
Then. at 1880 the court took a re-
cess until O'Clock, without deciding
the point raised.
When the court reconvened after
recess, Admiral Dewey announced th5
decision on the question of rebuttiEz
testimony, holding that witnesses may
be called at any time or recalled fol
the propose Of making corrections OF
former testimony or additions i'm the
nature Of corrections. This cannot
however. reiterate former evidence
The language If the court was as FOL
lows:
Decision Of the Court.
1.-The court has considered the mat
ter which was before il at the time OF
the recess and decides as follows. Adj
miral Schley requested the depart
ment to take such action as may bring
under discussion and review of hi.
brothers in arms certain criticisms
made upon him. This request midi
Gated that he desired the department e
order a court of inquiry to Investigate
the portions of his naval career Il
which sucr criticisms referred
In pursuance OF this request tn
department ordered a court Of inquiry
20 thoroughly inquire into all the cir
CumstanCeS bearing upon the SnbJec
of the investigation, directed the at
tentiun Of the court to certain i'm
pOrtant points and ordered the cour
to report all the pertinent facts Wliici
II may deem established. The cOur
is therefore requested to eTomine al
witnesses who Ia We any In Wedge @
the matters brought TO its attention
and is not bound by any technica
laws regarding evidence or procedure
and to this end witnesses may D.
called at any time or they may be re
called - make corrections or addl
lions In the nature Of corrections Il
their testimony that the facts Of tn
case may, if possible, be placed ciearl,
before the cour5, but no witness shat
reiterate former statements.
Later part OF this decision was re
peated by Captain Lemy 10 the wit
answer in accordance Herewith. Cap
gain LemIy then asked him to proceed
20 make such corrections of his testi
monv with his additions in ,he natUr
of corrections as ne might desire. Cap
tain Sigsbee answered as follows;
Sigsbee Makes &C ~rections.
Il have carefully. since my last test
mony, gone over an of my official docU
ments. all Of my private letters and tn
records of the ST. Paul. 1 have III
correction TO make n the teStimOn,
I then gave, So far as il was given eX
cepting that I said I cOuiu not recOlleC
whether there were one or two as
semblages of commanding officer
aboard ship of Santiago before the ar
rival of the flying squadron on the 26th
and if there were two visits one mus
have been on board the Yale. Ny To-
shows there were TWO assem- blages
both on board the Harvard and that
went on the second visit with the cap
tain of the Yale and from that I ha
come to the conclusion that the secon
visit was on board the Yale. That
the only correction / desire to make.
- desire to state however, that
informed Commodore Schley on the OC
cation of my visit to him on the 26tf
first, that I thought the ST. Paul ha
been chased by a torpedo boat on In
night of her arrival or the subsequen
night: second that I detailed to hin
the conversation between Capital
Goodrich of the St. Louis. and mysel
on board the ST. Paul as we passe
each other. when / was bound fTOT
Cape Haytieu TO Santiago and the 5
Louis was bound from Santiago
Cape Haytien.'
Saw the Press Boat.
The witness said that since he wa
on the stand he recalled that Ne di
see the press boat Somers n. Smith o.
May 2S and ne also seen the press boa
Premier this evening and had warne
those against remaining where the
then were because OF the dangers q
being attacked Is torpedo destroyers.
Continuing. he said that in his In
terview with Commodore Schley O
board the Brooklyn he was told by IN
commodore that the St. Paul was
30 with the flying squadron to Ke
West. and on the following day was {
take the Texas IN tow. The witnes
remarked; There was almost no cate
chism that time on the part of Com
modore Schley."
81 volunteered almost everything tha
I said about Santiago and the SPANS
feet" said the witness. His whol
CONVERSATION was on the subject O
coal and nothing but coal, and so ia
as I could judge he already had mad
up his mind TO return TO Key Wes
He told me that he was going to Ike
West"
On cross-examinaton M Rayno
asked about the statement that ia
SOwers n Smith had been Waue
against torpedo boats and the witnes
said he had given this warning becaus
he believed from his Information froI