The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1901-12-21

ncr, Lieutenant Commanders f1odSSon,
Switzerland. SHARP, Marsh and Wood
Major Wood. u. s. lf. Corps Lieutenant
Hood, Roys. and others. In most cases
these witnesses swore affirmatively to
fndicents OF winch Commodore Schley had
no recollection. Where the. matters thus
in dispute vera OF iinportance-and they
generally werc--it waa not only the right,
but the due or the court to accept the
one and reiects the otlier, and to report
in harmony with such decision. Every
court must do this when occasion arises
and such action constitutes no ground
for renandinS the case for reconsidera-
ton.
MEASUREMENTS OF FACr.
Some of tile minor nis-statcments Of
fact above refererd to as appearing in
tho paper under consideration are the
statement in, paragraph one that there
was no specification covering the voy-.
age from Key West to Cienfuegos,. when
this point Is in fact covered by. the first
and in part by the second clause ofrthe
precept; the complaint in paragraph two
{ of the paper that there was no Tiace5
mentioned in the McCalla memorandum
at which a camp of insurgents was To-
Gated, when the fact is that the court
does not say that there was such a.
place, but correctly paraphrases the mem
orandunl; the statement that the Mcealia
memorandum was sent to Commodore
ScfIey only FOR use in connection Win
the matter of batteries at ClenlueSOs,-
ana the statements in paragraph four
and elsewhere that the Judge advocate
had substantially made certain adnlls--
sions respecting matters under inquiry,
excepting the feature under the first part
o< clause eight of the precept that the
Flying Squadron did not Withdraw at
night from the entrance to Santiago to
a distance at sea and that no personal
cowaroice on the part of the applicant
had been established.
Paragraph twenty-six OF the paper I'M
der consideration reads: The malol1t!
OF the court have entirely failed 10 deler-f
mine 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 crcer
to determine properly the first spcclflca-s
ton of the rTccept as to the conduct OF
Commodore Schiey in connection Win
the events of the Santiago c2lnTalStl.
COUNSEL FAILED OE DUTY.
..If it is true that finding OF the
court upon this question was absolutely
necessary in order To. determine properly
the first specification OF the precept tllell
it 1uust-be stated that counsel Tor me
applicant failed Of their duty during the
inquiry. Several times in the course o..
the proceedings they brought this ques-
ton into court and took it out again
without giving the court opportunity to
rule unon it: once. even Withdrawing 1t
SO hastily: as to interrupt the president
of the court in a sentence that PROMISED
TO be an adverse ruling. Il they. seriously
believed. IS they now state to ne the
case that the matter OF command on
July Sd was essential TO the applicants
interest it was their plain duty not only
70 bring the question before the court,
but to insist upon a hearing there and
| others interested should have been heard
| TO request that the court now rule upon
I * is to ask that another officers inter-
ests be passed upon. to. his possible preJu-
| dice in his, absence and without q near
! ing-a thing intolerablc, whomsoever may
| be concerned.
| "In conclusion. we are satisfied that no
| GOOD purpose would lie served by remit
! ing the proceedings or any Of the teal.
| lres of this inquiry to- the court. "A
| more patient, exhaustive, and painstaklns
| hearing was never given; greater conSld-
| Grafton was never extended to any officer
/ than a military court OF lnqulrjI; noseA-
! oense was spared, no convenience or Ia
| cility denied: no courtesy refused. Inc
/. applicant has had his day in court. ana
| the judgment is against nm. IL IS ac-
| ,ordingIy- recommended thai. the proceed
| ings be not returned, but that the mat
| er lie concluded by the Departments
approval of the unanimous findings OF the
| court.
1--WE have the honor to be
(Signedl SAM Z. LkAlL1'
| Judge Advocate Court of Inquiry.
| ..E. >. HANNA,
| assistant 10 Judge Advocate.
..To the Secretary of the Navy