The Butte inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1901-1912, 1901-12-20

| Sampson was not in this battle. I wish
to say that we do not understand that
the question whether Admiral Sampson
was or was not in the battle of Santiago
Is before the court. If it is we shall be
happy to investigate it. Until The case
! takes that attitude it is improper to
spread upon the records arguments and
questions which proceed upon the the
| ory that he is in the case Counsel for
the applicant withdrew the question. At
pages 153, 400 and 1880 of the record
there were similar rulings by the judge
advocate. In the case of all those dec
| larations there was acquiescence of the
part of the court.
Ruled schley Not in Command.
'The court uniformly rejected evil
dence as to who commanded. On all the
pages herein cited from the record, the
court rejected such evidence and no.
where was it admitted against objec-
tion.
THE court more than once specifically
ruled t.iat this question was not be-
fore it.
For example: At page 1886, where
the question was as to the position of
the commander in chief and of the New
York and as to the part they took in
the battle, Admiral Dewey said: We
do not want that. We have ruled that
out The Judge advocate then asked
If. the court had SO ruled. and Admiral
Dewey replied: We have. We have
kept the New York out of it, See also
page 4S1.
'Nihe court went so far as to rule
at page 1421 that Admiral Schley was
not in command during the battle. The
matter then before the court related
to the periods during which Admiral
Schley had been in absolute command,
and the judge advocate said: Mr.. Ray
ner you are confining yourself to July
8, are your Mr. Rayner in reply ac-
quiesced in this view and the court ruled
that All questions shall
be confined to between the 18th of May
and the 1st of June. relating to the Or
ganization. management and control Of
that squadron, when he was actually
commander in chief Matters referring
to his alleged command on July were
excluded. On page 1888 the court con-
firms this decision.
"All proposed questions on this sub
ject were either rejected by the court
or withdrawn by the applicant, who
finally acquiesced in the decisions of
the court and gave up his efforts in this
behalf, saying:
Bows to Decision But
"I bow respectfully to the decision
/ of the court, and I know exactly what
/ it means Instances of the withdrawal
of such questions and of their rejection
by the court will be found in the record
at pages 13s 157. 4S4. 4S5 and 1880
The minority opinion expressed by
Admiral Dewey in this matter is at
variance with all the rulings of the court
in this regard and directly contradicts
the letters wherein Admiral Dewey for
the court defines Admiral Sampsons
status.
"The navy department in it's precept
had justly provided that any person in
terested' might be given an opportunity
,of appearing before the court in person
or by counsel. and protecting his rights.
"As counsel for the applicant ignored
at times the courts rulings and spread
upon the records arguments rejecting
upon Admiral Sampson. we as his coun-
Sci, three separate times appealed to the
court, asking for protection or for per-
mission to appear and defend Admiral
SIMPSONS rights.
Each time our request was denied and
we were assured that Admiral Sampson
was not involved. and finally. Admiral
Dewey acknowledging the receipt of one
OF our letters in which we had appealed
t. him on the ground Of this very ques-
tion as to who commanded at Santiago.
said: I have to state while the precept
convening this court gives 1t authority
to permit any person whom it may re-
gard as concerned in the investigation to
be present the court considers that Ad-
mral Sampson Is not an interested party
and you are further informed that II cir
cumstances arise which in the opinion of
, the court, render 1t necessary for Ad-
r,ruiral Sampson to be represented. due
notice win be sent him.
Upon the promise Admiral Sampson
relied. The notice came only in the form
sof a minority report by Admiral Dewey.
! q scussing matters beyond the scope Of
t. e precept and nowhere included in the
facts found by the court. Very respect
fully,
STATION AND CAMPBELL.
"E. s. THEALL,
Counsel for Rear Admiral w. T.
se ampson.
| ITO the Honorable Secretary Of the
Navy"