The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-10-06
correspondence Relative to an Al
legged CoIIoquy on the Brook
Ign Regarding the "LoOp."
WHAT THE COMMODORE SAID
THE LIEUTENANT Las VIEWS OF
HIS OWN As TO THAT.
schIey, However, Declares II Was
Cook. and Not Himself, Who Said
It-Chndwick's RepOr

and Admiral Schley during the period from
June 6. 1889. 10 Aug. ., 1901, which were
the central point Of to-day's testimony in
the court OF inquiry were made public in
full by the department late last night.
Most of IT already has been published in
the newspapers. although a part of 1t had
not been given out heretofore. On June 6,
1890, Admiral Schley wrote Lieutenant
Hodgson, incIosing an editorial from the
New York Sun. alleging that a colloquy
had taken place between Schley and HOdg-
son on the bridge of the Brooklyn during
the battle of Santiago. in the course Of
which the admiral is represented to have
said:
Damn the Texas. Let her look out for
herself"
This was IN reply 10 HodgsOn's remon-
STRANGE against turning the ship TO star
board. Characterizing this as a "grotesque
he the admiral asked HodgsOn to write
your denial of this o~ft-repeated calumny.
On June 8 HoGgson responded IN a very
long letter. dated at the New York navy
yard, denying that he authorized the pub-
hcation of the conversation and making a
long explanation of what he says occurred
during the battle. He added that
was printed 'as a part of a conversation
between you and ms is substantially cor
rect, though not as to the manner in which
IL took place
HodgsCn then tells of the rage with
which the Brooklyn people heard the sin
User whisper, on her return to Guantan-
smo bay, that they were gun shy and
he says he gave what he thought was a
true explanation of that turn to many Of
hcers OF the feet, none of whom failed to
agree with him. He explained that Admira
Schley regarded this turn as a strategical
maneuveT, Hooking to the further part the
Brookiyn was to play IN that days battle,
rather than as an effort TO avoid inter-
fering with the fire of the other vessels or
the feet. In fact. i thought then, as l
think now, that the turn to starboard
caused more Interference,
Then Hodgson gives his explanation or
the turn. He tells Of the belief that existed
that the Spanish ships outclassed the
Americans in speed. and that I'm the abb
sence of the New York, the Brooklyn was
the only American ship capable of prevent
ing the escape OF the Spaniards should
they pass the fire of the battleships. The
Spanish torpedo boats also were to be
reckoned with. Therefore" says Hodg-
son, after putting the helm to starboard
and to port once or twice to counterfeit the
efforts of the Theresa and Viscaya to get
into closer action and ram us, and after
the leading Spanish ship had reached just
a little abaft our port beam, you decided
to port the helm and turn around In chase
70 prevent the escape of any of the Span
ish vessels"
HODGSON'S SUGGESTION.
Hodgson writes that he suggested that
.h-s- -t.-H,a~1 haara
and that there was danger of running into
her and getting right across her line of fire.
and that schley replied that the Texas
would have to look out for that; that it
was imperative TO get around Immediately,
and that by turning to port you would get
so close TO the enemy hat you would ex-
pose yourself to attack from the torpedo
boats; that a lucky shot or two by the
enemy might disable the Brooklyn, ana that
you did not propose TO run such a risk at
that stage OF the battle, When IL was 50
unnecessary and when SO much depended
on the speed OF the Brooklyn
HodgsOn writes that he then suggested
backing the starboard engine, because IL
would shorten the circle and give the Texas
a wide BERTH" and that Schley replied afte-
a pause. mo, because it would ueaden our
speed OF turning and you wished TO get
around as quick as possible. For weeks
otter the battle Captain Cook was under
the impression that we had packed the
starboard engine"
Hodgson explains that in making the sug-
gestion he was discharging his duty as the
navigator of the ship, charged with her
safety. and st the moment did not consider
the erect OF the turn on the results of the
battle, and he adds: 1 immediately per-
ceived that your cool judgment at this try
ing moment had enabled you 10 consider
the result OF your decision, and then, as
now. Il seemed TO me that you had decided
most wisely; that IL was a strategical move
OF the greatest Importance. and that the
result of the battle most fully proved its
wisdom"
Hodgson goes on TO declare that ne was
under the impression up TO the time he saw
the New York Sun publication, including
the colloquy. that Schiey made the turn to
starboard because the conditions were as
he (HodgsOn) had stated. Continuing, he
assures the admiral that he never would
nave given the explanation he did of the
loop had he for a moment suspected that
the admiral had given any other reasons.
Jnoer date OF Washington. June 10. 1899.
annoyance from the newspaper attack
says.
loquy should be made up by them hat did
not occur between you and me. and IL is
this that / desire TO protect you against.
OF course you dld not authorize this. and
Ii IS this dialogue which should be denied.
i have no recollection whatever of any,
thing Of the kind. and my memory is eX-
ceedlngly clear OF the events of that day.
for / never felt In ali my life less excite
ment or more Steadiness OF judgment than
when the DOnS came out that day. When
the turn Was made the BROOKLYN was. In
my Judgment, within the distance of their
tactical diameter, and IL il Cthe turn had
been 20 port we should probably have
passed into their line of fire. but. havfnc
them exposed TO the uninterrupted fire OF
all the ships. So important i'm the earlier
mOments of the tight. the proper strategy
or a battle was TO avoid interfering with
that. and the sequel shows that We made
no mistake Cook really gave the order
which ! approved. and IL is possible thai
your conversation was with him. but the
suns effort has been % promote the heller
or the Nation that you and / had a CON
troversy at the critical Oment. and this
Is unjust 10 you and 10 me
SIMPLY a DENIAL"
What desire Is simply your denial that
any such c~olloquy occurred. and I win see
that proper correction is made 10 cover
you from this SANDER. There Is much in
your letter that l would not Ike 10 use.
ana IL would provoke assault upon Won
which / am unwilling 10 have happen. but
what / want 10 show is simply thas this
dialogue did not occur. and that shown
the whole himsy canard falls to the ground
Make your letter as short as possible
Two letters came on June II from the
New York navy yard I'm answer 10 This
letter In one. very short. HOdgso0 saws.
The cotlOquy published i'm the New York
Sun and alleged % have taken Mace he
tween you and me on the dav of the hattie
on Santiago. July ., ISIS, never occurrcd
The second. letter is explanatory. Hodg-
son repeats that ne told the sun reoorter
that The nrsf uuhlfeaf fou a. 49,. -