The age-herald., 1901-10-17
Evidence Favorable to Admiral Sch|ey Is Brought Out
 h the Proceedings
SAVED BODY OF DEAD SEAMAN
Commander Sears Again Denies That He Ever Said Anything Reflect Ing Upon the Conduct of
 His Superior.

Admiral Schley's flagship. the Brooklyn, occupied the attention of the Schley court of inquiry for the entire day.
 The proceedings began with the recall of Captain Cook and Lieutenant Com mander Sears, both of whom made ma terial additions to their form CT testimony, and they were followed in succession by Commander N F. Mason, who was the executive officer of the Brooklyn, Lieu tenant Edward McCauley, Jr.. who was signal officer, and Lieutenant Charles Webster. who had charge of the forward gun deck battery of the Brooklyn during the battle off Santiago and was watch officer on board that ship. Captain Cooks new testimony related to the un- coupling of the Brooklyns engines and to the voyage of the flying squadron from Cienfuegos to Santiago explaining in made on that occasion.
 Commander Sears spoke again of the conversation reported as having taken place between himself and officers of the Massachusetts in the ward room of that vessel on May 31 in which he was alleged to have said that it had been difficult to get Commodore Schley up to the point of undertaking the bombardment of the Colon, and he again denied that he had said anything refiecting upon his superior officer.
 McCauley and Webster all gave accounts of the engagement of July 3. MT. Me- Cauley recited in detail the signals made in connection with that historical event at the instance of Commodore Schley. When asked if Commodore Schley had said anything during the battle for the encouragement of the men this witness replied that he several times had said: Give 'em hell, bullies!' All these wit nesses testified that the conduct of the Commodore when under fire was cool and courageous.
 Captain Cook Testifies. e
 While Captain Cook occupied the wit ness stand for the purpose of correcting his testimony MT. Hanna asked him: Referring to your statement in regard to the steam required to be kept up in connection with the uncoupling of the Brooklyn's engines, that 1t was the order of the commander-in-chief while lying off Santiago on the blockade, was that a written order?"
 My recollection is that it was a bulle- tin. The exact words do not remember. v
 ''The particular point was with respect to the uncoupling of the engines; was there anything in that order on this sub ject in pursuance with what was done?"
 .'It is my impression that there was. They all, as I understood 1t, had their engines uncoupled."
 Tt Is a general recollection of 1t only ?'
 "Yes; that we should have our forward engines uncoupled all the time"
 Gan you aid us in any way in identify ing the bulletin from your impression 2"
 "No, we could not have moved the four engines on the steam we carried. I know we had an order about the speed. and 1t was a circular bulletin, I think"
 Captain Cook was also questioned again concerning the voyage of the flying squadron from Cieiifuegos to Santiago as follows:
 Did the flying squadron, when proceed ing from Cienfuegos to Santiago, proceed with all dispatch?'
 Throwing out of consideration the sur rounding circumstances and conditions that have already been stated, should say so."
 MT Rayner: But putting in the sur rounding circumstances and conditions, you would say yes. would you not?''
 Yes"
 cident to the Vixen on the voyage be- tween Cienfuegos and Santiago?"
 Yes. I think 1t was at the time she signalled the blowing out of her gasket man-hole or something of that kind"
 Lieutenant Commander Sears also made a correction in his testimony for the pur- pose of explaining the disposition of the Qa at f,fO wb crt, was in charge of the blockade of Santia- go. He said these vessels had been sent distance on each night and every night in different directions on account of the fear of torpedo attacks.
 Denies Making Statement
 The judge advocate then asked the fol- lowing questions: "In regard to the con- versation in the ward room of the Massa- chusetts as alleged on May 31 in c.Sder to refresh your memory in regard to that matter, you are informed that Lieutenant Potts. Lieutenant Grant, Lieutenant Glennon and Major Weed are supposed to have been present and participated in that conversation"
 "I do not recollect it at all. It douId not be possible that I said such thing Te.ey have misunderstood what I said. In the ward room talk something might have been construed in that way as state ments often are. but 1t is entirely impos- sible that could have said that. I was impatient excited perhaps 1t being my first engagem ent, aeA might have made some remark. It Is something some one might have misunderstood. hut that re- mark never made"
 "As recall, was irritated at Captain Higginsons request to delay the recon- noissance until after the mems dinner- remember that very we'll"
 The court questioned Commander Searp on various points covered by his testi- mony of yesterday. He said in reply to these questions that on the morning of July the Brooklyn began turning to starboard immediately after the engines were started, that the helm of the Brook lyn had been put aport when the helm of the vizcaya had been put aport. Tt