The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1901-12-19

n;oned in his behalf, ana all that portion
! OF the evidence OF witnesses called by the
/ julge-advocate, which was favorable to
| the said Commodore Schley.
/ '@25. The majority opinion Of the court
| is inconclusive, in that it is entirely silent
upon a charge preferred by the judge
! advocate during the course OF the pablic
/ Investigation and claimed oy him to come
| within the purview CT the first specitica-
| ton. to-wit: That the said Commodore
t Schley was derelect in the discharge cf
! his duty and unDliadful of the reguia-
| tons for the government of the navy OF
| the United States, in that he did not pre-
| scribe and promulgste anticipatory or
| ders.
"2G. The majority of the court have ell
! tirely failed to determine as to who was
| in command of the American naval forces
| engaged in the battle of Santiago the
| finding Of which fact was absolutely
necessary in order to determine properly
| the first specification of the precept as
to the conduct of Commodore Schley in
connection with tho events of the San
! tiaGo campaign.
..227. The majority OF the court have re-
| jected the whole of the testimony offered
| in behalf of the applicant ana have not
| atertel 70 Sucll testimony ana nave en-
| tirely ignored the testimony of the appi-
cant himself, who was on the stand for
| many hours and subjected to the mos5
searching examination, and by so doing
| they have perverted the ends OF justice.
| That if this testimony was all false they
| should have so announced, and If all or
any part of it was true the said applicant
was entitled to the benefit of il. and By
declining to consider or pass upof- it they
| have deprived him of his common law
and constitutional rights.
..2S. That the majority of the court have
| found the applicant guilty upon specifica-
lions which were substantially abandoned
by the judge-advocate. as will appear
from the argument in the case.
| ONLY TOOK HOSTILE WITNESSES.
100. That the whole proceedings show
that the majority the court. in the
opinion and report Of facts rendered, have
| selected the testimony of a few hostile
witnesses. and upon that testimony have
based the said opinion and report of facts,
discarding all the other testimony in the
case without making the slightest refer
ence to it, as they were directed by the
Drecapt to do.
-s The applicant besides the rea-
| sons herein given. hopes to be able dur
ing the further investigation OF this In
curry to adGuce other serious and COM
plete reasons why the majority opinion
4. The applicant is prepared to Sow
.hat the whole proceedings upon the
part of the majority of the court have
been entirely irregular: that his rights
have been prejudlcets and ignored: that
his testimony i'll many mole particulars
than have been herein cited mas not oeeh
| considered and that the evidence Is an-
soluteiy insufficient to sustain the opinion
which has been rendered by the ma
| iority of the court; that 4 grave !nJus-
| tice has been committed, which would
| become irreparable and be perpetuated,
! unless this opinion Of the majority of the
| court should De disproved.
| Wherefore, the :aid applicant most
respectfully prays that approval of the
| opinion of the majority OF said court
! of inquiry be withheld, and that said
! opinion be disapproved and that he may
be afforded the opportunity to have the
witnesses properly considered and passed
! ,lpon. and the proceedings be RENTED
| to the court for that purpose, ana that
| he be given such other and further relief
as he is entitled to in the premises.
~ ISADOR RAYNEk.
JAMES PARKER,
Counsel for applicant.
(Si-ned) W. S. SCHLEY,
Rear-Admiral U. 5, n. (Retired2
AS TO SIMPSONS PROTEST.
The letter asking permission to argue
against the protest of Admiral sampson
is as follows:
washington. D. c., December IS. l9oi-
Sir:-In regard to the reported intention
of Rear Admiral w. T. Sampson, l. 3
n. by his counsel, to file with your con-
sent n protest against your approval OF
that portion of the dissenting opinion or
Admiral George Dewey. L. S. N, to the
majority finding of q court Of inquiry re-
Gently held and before which L was the
applicant. wherein the question or COM
membership of the American naval forces
during the battle of Santiago IS decided
in favor of Commodore w. S. Schiey, L.
s. n. and credit for the victory won IN
that battle accorded to the said Commo-
dore Schley, I have the honor TO most
respectfully request as follows:
so That il such protest Is Med VITA
YOU by the said Rear Admiral w. T.
Sampson, L. S. N, may be given an
opportunity TO present. through my coun-
sci, oral argument against suc!! protest
yours respectfully,
(Signed.} W. ,. sNEAl'Cl'
Rear Admiral, U. S. \. Retired).
JSIDOR kAYNGR.
JAMES PARKER,
Counsel for the applicant before said
court OF inquiry.
Commenting on to-day's action "f-
Rayner said:
THE objections which we have hiea
rest upon the ground that admiral