The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1901-09-13
HoWlsoMs PUsuo UTTERANcEs
Reporter Testified that He Spoke of Adj
miral Schley in a Sneering Manner

Repcrter Testified that He Spoke OF Adj
niral Schey in a Sneerlng Manner.
Mir. Francis A. Frost of the Boston
Record, who had reported conversation
with Rear Admiral Howison In which the
latter was alleged to have mldr rehcc
tions upon Admiral Schley, was called to
the stand The witness explained the
nature of his duties In securing news from
tue Charlestown navy yard He than detail
T. the conversation dc is said to have had
with Admiral IIowison THIS occurred, he
said in the commandments Office, and while
II had not been given with the distinct
understanding that 1t should he published,
there was no Injunction Of secrecy. Pub
licatlons had begun to appear concerning
the credit for the victory, These had been
referred to during The witness visit to
Admiral lIow,son and in reply the admiral
stated, so the witness testified, thar Samp-
son WAS entitled to the credit az the vie
tory at Santiago. Admiral liowisOn de-
scribCd the duties which had deyoiVcd upon
sampson, how the vessels had been placed
OF the entrance Of the hurbor 60 Sdayd
against the escape of the spanish nNet,
The witness said Admiral Howison stated
thHt If the American heet had been DE-.
fcucd Admiral sampson would have been
asked. how had occurred
Mr., Frost said he had suggested that toe
public seemed disposed TO give tnr credit
90 Schley. In response he testihoh, Adnli-
raj How lson went on To say that Admiral
SIMPSONS standing ms I'm officer and as
man was greatly superior TO that or Schley.
what he said pursued the witness,
'!uClncd me 10 the BELIEF that he had no
use for Admiral SChlcy'
The witness also gave in detail the cir
cumst1nces leading mp to the publication,
ON CrOss-eNamluatiuu he WAS shown the
prcCept ana was asked BY solicitor Hanna
IL Admiral lloWisOn had expressed an opln-
ion on the points IN the prVcppt. The Wit
ness thought he had not. as many points
In the precept were not Involved in the
conversation. The witness adhered TO his
first statement. On redirect examination
Mr.. Raynor asked
What was Admiral Howisoh's manner
during his conversation with Your
lie spoke of Schlcy In what ! would
call sneerlng manner" replied the wit
ness.
Occasionally during the examination Of
this witness there was slight issue between
counsel, but on the whole there was little
or no objection 60 the, lines on which the
William L. Spou. business man rcsid.
ing IN New York city and having, business
next called. lie said he had come over %r
from London to New York on board the
steamship Minneapolis, Admiral IIowison
being on the ship. He said Admiral Howl
son had stated that sampson had been in
command OF the fleet when the fight of
Santiago occurred; that Schlcv was sub
ordinate aud that Schcy should have been
Foster Nichols of Yonkers, y. Y. Admiral
Howlson's place Of rosidegcc was next
called. In response 20 questions from Mr..
Raynor he said that he had been at An
mirHl Howson's home last July re had
been with the admiral looking over n book
II which there was 2 nIIctnro OF Admiral
that Schley had boon guilty of disubodlcnce
and that in the English navy such con
duct would have deprived him OF his POSI-
Recess,