The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1901-11-08
SAYS SCHLEY DESERVES
NO CREDIT FOR VICTORY
CONTINUED from Page l.
(Continued from PAGE u

CONTINUED
particularly by the facl with regard
10 the latter coEditiSn, that she was
using the ArdOis system Of signals for
, Iurs after getting under way. 1t
would appear that there was lite to
prevent its departure for toe eastward
from being discovered and in due
course communicated 10 Santiago.
He admitted that the weather on
the YOyage az pau Tor the smaller yes
sells, particularly the Eagle, and said
that the speed Of the squadron was
slowed in order that trcy might keep
up. He continued. however, saying
that if that Vessel was 10 be sent away
she should have been so sent at the
time when she was causing = e delay
and not when the voyage was pcac-
tically completed and the weather inn
proving.
IN this connection he suggested that
all the slower vessels, in view Of the
urgency of reaching Santiago. might
have beeen dropped with a rendezvous.
10 be Joined later by the lighting yes
sells If drummer boy stubs his toe.
he asked. does The army hslt?"
The Coaling Question.
Having brought the squadron to the
southWGrd Of Santiago on May Is. the
judge advocate took up the coaling
question, quoting Lieutenant Dyson's
ngures on the question o. coal supply,
in some detail.
Then he considered the retrograde
movement. This step, he said, had been
undertaken without sufficient or de-
clslVe steps being taken to ascerta IN
whether the Spanish fleet was actually
ia the harbOr of Santiago. leaving the
mouth of the harbOr unmatched. and
CerVera free to escape, with the pos
sibiity of his making a descent upon
our coast the moral, 10 say nothing
Of the material effect of which il is inn
possible to Overestimate"
Continuing in this connection, he
said: 1T matters not what Captain
Sigsoee or Pilot Nunez told Commodore
Scnley- If NuneZ exhibited then no
greater acumen than when before this
court the information he supplied
should have been given little weight.
Whatever opinion he may have Civ
EN- the commodore as TO the presence
OF the parish squadron in the harbor
OF Santiago (and 1 believe that the cap
tain never said that the Spanish feet
was not therein), the commodore was
alone responsible for the retrograde
mo yeE-ent. II was his duty 20 ascer-
tam to a certainty whether the Spanish
ships were in the harbor. an obligation
which no negative information of Cap
tain Sigsbees could remove or even
modify. And it is inconceivable that
positive statement as to the contents
OF harbOr Of the we'll known con-
hrmation of Santiago could have been
made by Sigsbee."
Retrograde Movement.
The details OF the retrograde move
ment were rehearsed, as We're those
concerning the delivery of dispatches
by the Harvard and the proffer o.
Lieutenant Beale to go ashore and
communicate with the Cuban insur-
gents. Captain Lemly cOntended that
the dispatch conveying positive infor-
nation of the presence of the Span
iards must have been delivered to Com
mod0re Schley Notwithstanding the de-
NAL because he considered it "incOn-
celN able that in hSving it, Captain Cot
ton should have not communicated it's
contents to the commodore"
Here Captain LemIy quoted in full
Commodore Schley's cannot obey or
ders' dispatch 10 the department, of
May 81 and commented upon it, say
ing;
Whether the departments instrUc-
tons definitely directed, in positive
Santiago, or whether its desire that
this should be done was simply indi-
Gated appears to me, under all the cir
cumstances. 20 be immateriai Dis
obedience of orders may be an impeTa-
tive and glorious duty, but if il be not
justified by the facts, it cannot be con-
dOned by terming it an error of judg-
ment- This was not an error of judg-
ment; it was an error of conduct"
Squadron at Santiago.
Bringing the squadron back to San
tiagO. the judge advocate said that
nothing was done towards attacking
the enemy until the 31st Of May, when
the reconnaissance or bOmbardment was
made, the total time Of all firing then
being seven minutes and thirty-dve
seconds.
The Colon was not destroyed or dis
abled, and, with the possible exception
of one shot, all fell short Only three
vessels Of the force available were en-
plOyed in this affair. II has been
claimed that the object of this affair
OF May 81 was to develop the enemy's
batteries and that this was accom-
plished
There is, however, a great deal of
doubt, in view of th5 varying signals
and statements made " the cOmmO-
dOre, both before and after the cti0n.
as to WAT was the real object. wheth-
CT a reconnaissance or an attempt TO
destroy the Colon.
The defense or the failure to 80 in
close on May 81 by pleading at this
time the C7utiuua~y order of April 6
does not appear TO be sufficient. even
If the commodore was acquainted with
its contents. he order mOdifies itself
and from first 10 last clearly indicates
that our fleet was to be kept for the
Spanish ships and that the destruction
of the later was its paramount mis-
sion"
Battle of July 8.
Coming to the battle Of July g. Cap
tain LeTnly said: I have never doubt
ed. and the evidence addUced confirms
my view in this respect, that the Brook
lyn, as q ship, did conspicuous duty in
this battle. on the other hand, sub
nit that the evidence shows that 10
was a capta ms night and. without dis
paragement of Commodore Schley's
personal conduct on that occasion, that
there was no such concerted action of
the vessels engaged as to indicate THEN
control by any one person. All evil
denly strOye TO do their utmost and
thus accomplish one OF the greatest
naval victories ever won.
OF course, the vessels stood in to-
wards the harboc entrance when il was
discovered that he erem. s vessels
We're making q sortie. such was not
only their prescribed duty, but their
natural and proper course in such cir
cumstances. In like manner, when the
Spanish fleet stood TO the westward
il was the duty Of our vessels to follow.
whether or not the signSl follow flag