The Black Hills union. [volume] (Rapid City, Pennington County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1889-1904, 1901-11-15
CLOSE
IN SCHLEYY CASE
Judge Advocate LemIy Makes
the Concluding Adj
dress.
RAINIER MOVES COURT

Y
Counsel Makes q Deep Impress
sion-Sampson's Request
Again Refused.
Washington, Nov. 9.-Judge Advocate
Lemly today made the. concluding argu-
ment IN the Schley court Of INQUIRY.
There was no forenoon session of the
court and the judge advocate did not
begin his address until 2 o'clock. He
read from manuscript and spoke in
clear, distinct tones. The first half Of
the address was devoted to a consider
alton Of the points made by Rayner
and Parker in Schley's behalf, the lat
ter half to a general review from the
government point of view of the evil
dence.
The court declined to grant the re-
guest made yesterday by Attorney
Thrall. acting for Sampson, that the
remarks of Parker concerning the fact
That the Colon lay in the harbor of
Santiago for some hours after the ar
rival there OF Sampson be stricken
from the record.
Lenly's Address.
Captain Lemly said in part:
In entering upon my duties as judge
advocate had in mind the advice
given me by the secretary Of the navy
soon after my appointment. as follows:
.Schley asks for a court Of inquiry. See
that g perfectly impartial court Is con-
stituted. The Judge advocate and.
counsel assisting him are not in court
to prosecute anybody or find anybody
guilty, but to bring out the facts and
aid h court in declaring the truth,
II have endeavored to follow this
advice, without fear or favor. II I
have appeared to fail in maintaining
that impartial attitude which I feel
n have always felt towards the APP
plicant 1t is because aggression, how
ever natural on the part OF earnest
counsel. begets aggression, and for the
further reason that in many instances
throughout the investigation honest
difference OF opinion has compelled me
to be earnestly contentious in order to
adduce what i believed to be material
facts. I deem 1t not inappropriate that
should here remark the navy Depart
ment In this matter has maintained an
entirely neutral attitude. I have not
been interfered with by 1t In my con-
duct OF h case. ! am confident the
evidence adduced has fully Justified the
views Of the department set forth In
its reply OF February 6, 1899, to the
Se re- Ald - dlkdlIS
wherein 1t is stated OF schley, referring
particularly to the naval battle OF.
July 8:
What Department Said.
Where so much was achieved In.
this eliminating battle. where his ship
was such q conspicuous force in the
fight, his conduct while In independent
command prior to June /, the record of
which has been given above and which
by reason Of its unsteadiness in pur-
pose and inpush, and In failure to obey
orders, did not meet the approval Of
the president and the department. was
vet not permitted to stand in the way
of his nomination for promotion to a
higher grade for the part he took in
the final triumph"
Lemly then said the voluminous evil
derce had been so fully treated in all
Its bearings 1t was not his purpose to
briefly referred to the various incidents
Of h campaign In controversy, Ills de-
ductions being In keeping with the spe-
~cifications Of the precept and the con-
tenticps OF the government counsel, as
brought out during the Inquiry.
Speaking Of the retrograde move
ment, Lemly said the step had been un-
~dertnken without SUFFICIENT or decisive
steps being taken to ascertain whether
the Spanish fleet was actually in the
harbor of Santiago. leaving the mouth
OF b harbor unmatched. CerYera was
free to escape. with the possibility Of
his making q descent upon u coast.
the moral. to say nothing OF the mate
rial effect Of which, itsis is impossible
to- overestimate."
ouoht;to Have Made Certain.
Continuing, HI said: ut matters not
what Sigsbee or Pilot Nunez told
schley. II Nunez exhibited then no
greater acumen than when before the
court the Information he! supplied
should have been given little weight.
Whatever opinion they may have given
the commodore as to the presence of
the Spanish squadron in the harbor Of
Santiago land I believe the captain
never said the Spanish fleet was not
theretnl. b commodore alone was re-
~sponsfble for the retrograde movement.
It wa1 his duty to ASCERTAIN to a. Ger.
tainty whether the Spanish ships were
In the sharbor, ansobligation which no
NEGATIVE Information OF Sigsbee's could
remove Or even modify. And 1t ii In
conceivable that q positive statement
40 to the contents Of the harbor. from
the well known conformation Of SAN
tiAgo. could have been made by Sigs-
bee
The details Of the retrograde moves
ment were ~reheArsed, AZ were those
COHCeIUAI48 IM0 QGlVeTy OF 0l1p4tcne0
by the Harvard and the proRer OF
Lieutenant Beale to go ashore to com.
municats with the Cuban Insurgents.
IAmly commended the dispatch onvey
Ing positive information Of the pres-
ence OF the Spaniards must have been
delivered to Schley. Notwithstanding
his denial becaNse he considered &c
.4nconceivable that, having II, Cotton
should not have communicated it, con-
tents to the commodore"
Here lemly quoted IN full schley's
.cannot obey Ordersya dispatch to the
department and commented npon Il.
AAytng;
Whether the departments instruc-
lions definitely directed, In positive
terms, that the squadron remain on
Santiago r whether tts desire that
lthis should be done was simply indi.
Gated, appears 70 me, under all the
1cdrcupstances, 70 BE- immaterial. DiS-
Iobedlsncs OF orders may be an impera-
tive and.glOrtous$s duty. but II 1t Be not
Justified by facts. 1t cannot be con-
donedEby terminE - an error OF judg-
rne1t. This was not IN error Of judg.
tn6nt. Il Wassan error Of conduct
naynsrs 0rilllant Essork
tMANryysRaynef.tt the schiefacounsel forsAd.