Griggs courier. (Cooperstown, Griggs Co., Dak. [N.D.]) 1885-1902, 1901-10-10
||lk||lA|I| thtt SAMPSON lH',
Question. Of Word in syD
sschley" \ Letter Nay | d Fl
Asked Him on Stand. =
ORIGINAL IS PRODUCED BY LEElY.

Shown That the Erasurc Was Made
Before the Letter Was Copied and
Decentralization Of Certain News-
paper Clippings Objected To By
Mr. Rayner, schley's Counsel.
Washington, Oct. 7.-Lieutenant
Commander Hodgson, formerly navi-
gator of Commodore Schley's flagship,
the Brooklyn, continued his testimony
before the Schley court of inquiry Sat-
urday, after some of the other wit
nesses of Friday had been given an
opportunity to correct their testi-
mony. When the court adjourned Fri
day night Commander Hodgson was
in the hands of Judge Advocate Lem
~, whose examina ton of him partook
very largely of the nature of cross
examination. This was due to the fact
that Mr.. Hodgson had been called by
both sides Of the controversy and was
considered even more Schley witness
than government witness. Capt.
Lemly and Mr.. Hanna continued the
inquiry for the government at the be-
ginning of the sitting Saturday, after
which Mr.. Rayner began a series of
questions intended to present the
Schley side of the conduct of the
Brooklyn during not only the. battle OF
July 3, but of the entire Santiago cam
paign. Mr.. Hanna inquiries were de-
voted partly to developing more of the
details concerning the bombardment
of the Spanish ship Cristobal Colon on
May 81. The entire correspondence
between Commander Hodgson and
Commodore Schley was also put in as
evidence.
The court began its session Saturday
with the understanding that there
would be only one sitting. This agree
ment was reached Friday and was
brought about by the fact that the
members of the court and counsel find
themselves greatly fatigued by the
exacting nature of their work and the
continuous sessions of the court.
The Sampson Episode.
There is much interest in Fridays
episode concerning Admiral Sampson,
and there is still doubt as to whether
he will be witness. It will remain
with Admiral Schley and his counsel
to say for what day, if for any, he shall
be called. The controversy as to the
admiral's meaning in his "Dear
Schley" dispatch of May 30 has in
no wise been abated by the tentative
agreement as to his being summoned.
Counsel on both sides Saturday morn
ing had before them copies of the dis
patch and each was trying strenuously
to bring the other to their view Of the
case.
Testimony in Brief.
Extracts from the evidence given
Saturday are as follows:
Lieutenant Commander Albion G. Hodg-
son was asked by Capt. Lemly about his
correspondence with Admiral Schley con-
corning what the Judge advocate denom-
mated a newspaper "colloquy." The wit
ness took exception to the use Of the
word "colloquy" and Capt. Lemly reply
that this was the witness own characteri-
cation.
The letters were then read by the Judge
advocate. Commander Hodgson Identify
ing the various documents as they were
separately. presented Mr.. Rayner said
that If desired the letters would be accept
ed as evidence and that they could be
printed without being read. Capt. Lemly
replied. however,. that he considered that
the letters have an important bearing upon
the precept and that therefore he pre-
ferred to read them.
While the reading of the letters between
Admiral i Schley and Lieutenant Com
mander Hodgson and newspaper articles
bearing upon the correspondence was In
progress Mr.. Rayner objected to the read
ing of one Of the newspaper statements as;
irrelevant. The reading had required con-
siderable time.
Admiral Dewey said: ''Those things could
all have been printed. You. are taking
valuable time here. Wewant facts-facts.
We don't want newspaper articles. We
have ruled these out. Cannot these mat
tiers be printed?"
Capt. Lemly-Then they would be in evil
dence. Do you mean yeu don't want them
at all? sts B.
Admiral Dewey-we want them. Could
not they be printed like other papers?
Objectionable Editorials.
Mr.. Rayner-We want everything that
passed between Lieut.. Hodgson and Com
modore Schley that appertains to this con-
troversy. but we would not like this record
to contain editorials against Commodore
Schley. I do not think there ought to be
printed in the record an editorial against
Admiral Schley or any other admiral orsin
favor of him which was never seen by ADJ
miral Schley at all. That article was not
sent in any letter to Admiral schley.> He
says not.
Capt. Lemly-1t is really part of the
correspondence and referred to. We do
not contend for one moment that any al
legations that may be made in that editor
ial against Admiral Schley are proof Of.
what these allegations are, but this is a
part Of the correspondence and necessary
in determining. as to what was the pro-
priety Of Commodore Schley's conduct
in the premises.
Mr.. Rayner-Would you take state
ment from me now that Admiral Schley
says he never saw 1t and never received It?
Judge Advocate-You have made that
statement.
Mr.. Rayner-I do not think this record
ought to be stained with these calumnies
against Admiral Schley.
Ruling of the Court.
The court then retired for consultation
and after few minutes returned, making
the following announcement through ADJ
miral Dewey: 1.-THE court decides that any
clippings from newspapers which form a
part of the correspondence between Adj
miral Schley and Lieutenant Hodgson,
Shoild nrOnerly he made - 2