The sun., 1901-12-19
sCHLEY's OBJECTIONS.
Statement Filed With Secre-
tary Long.
SAYS MAJORITY IGNORED EVIDENCE

SAYS MAJORITY lGNOhbD EVIDENCE
alleges THAT the Findings Are Di-
rectIy Opposed to Uncontroyertcd
Testimony Introduced both by Ne
sense and by Government.
washington, Dec. 19.-Rear Admiral
scnlcy has filed with Secretary Long
through his counsel n statement OF his
objections to the findings of the court
" inquiry. He requested that the sec.
rrtury Of the navy disapprove the find
ings Of the majority of the court and
tlat Tie statement Of objections be re.
ferTed to the court for action.
admiral Schlcy also submitted let
tcr requesting an open hearing on the
protest of Admiral Sampson against
Admiral Dewey's opinion as to who
commanded Mt the battle Of Santiago
The bill Of objections asserts that the
majority Of the court decided that
Commodore Schley should have pro-
ccodrd with the utmost dispatch Off
lienfuegos when there was no specif.
cation covering this point and the ap-
plicant had no opportunity to furnish
evidence on 1t.
The fact that no place was mention
ed on what is known as the McCalla
memorandum for meeting the insur.
gents is regarded as a paramount rea-
son why communication was not held
with them and that the memorandum
was sent to Commodore Schlcy only
for use in connection with its informa-
tian relative to certain batteries in the
vicinity Of Cienfucgos. The bill con.
frnals that overwhelming evidence was
presented to show that close block
ah Of Cienfuegos was maintained and
that the majority Of the court ignored
uncontradicted testimony proving that
the British steamer Adua was allowed
q enter Clcnfuegos to obtain informa-
tiGn regarding the Spanish fleet.
Dispatch No. z.
II In declared that the order of Admi-
raj Simpson known as No WAS an
Imperative order for Commodore
Sealcy 10 hold his squadron Off Cienfu-
egoS, whether the Spanish fleet was in
IAdL llufDOf or not.
Il is stated chat the majority Of the
court ignored the fact that Captain Ey-
ans failed to communicate to ComnIo-
dore Schlcy the meaning of the signal
lights at Gicnfuegos and that Commo-
d4lc Schlcy, as proved. had no knowl.
edge of these lights until the night Of
May -, 1893.
lhe majority erred, II Is further ar
gtcd, in stating that Commodore
ShLicy received no positive information
from the scout ships as to the enemy's
presence In Santiago harbor, because
1anain Sigsbce had reported that the
Spanish fleet was not there. The bill
also declares that the coal charts,
showing the chasing capacity of tile
jillnE squadron, have been ignored ana
wat 10 reference has been made to the
"EaerS Of the secretary OF the navy for
bfldihg the hazartllng of the American
Slips against shore batteries.
The Loop Of the BroolxIyn.
he demonstration made by COmmo-
'mr Schley before Santiago on Man %
;lHi 10, 1t is asserted, was predetcl min.
cd aud executed solely MS Il rcconnois-
s.llre ana not rs formal attack upon
lan Cpon or other vessels. The ma or
~ opinion of the court, il is held, is
AttEigupns with respect tu the loon OF
tat brooklyn in that il holds that said
ia7l was made to avoid getting into
alll@rroiS proximity to the Spanish
'tNNrIS without stating whether such
Aci was due to personal fears of Com.
i4adare Schley or to his desire to pre-.
serve his ship intacr.
llr majority of the court, II is sub.
iHI.ird. ignored overwhelming tcstlno-
~ Eat the Brooklyn did not lose ci-
itor distance or position with the
nlailSll ships in making the turn; that
Nlte majority opinion is ambiguous up.
~ tIlh backing of the Texas in that II
NN'a not state whether the danger OF
toH'S'en was real or imaginary.
Conduct Not ynciIIatinG.
II is argued that the opinion that
commodore Schley's conduct was char.
Y t'fiAed by vacillation, dilatoriness
una lack of enterprise is not justified
* he evidence and that the majority
"RlhlRn is silent upon charge that
9lIl'aodorc Schlcy was derelict in the
uIsnhi'rse Of his duty. The majority OF
tli' court, 1t is declared failed to deter
1tlll" who was commander in chief in
ur' battle Of Santiago, which finding
M5lS necessary to determine the first
ePt'lhcation of the precept as to the
'WhlNIct Of Commodore Schley.
he majority of the court, the appli.
eahl asserts, rejected the whole of the
lllhony in his behalf and has per.
f'Fird the ends of justice and deprived
.llh OF his common law and constitu-
..oliAl rights. He maintains that he
n1a been found guilty upon specifica.
u2a abandoned by the Judge advocate
wy mat the testimony OF few hostile
illnesses has been made prominent
ne bill concludes with the state.
,ilHl'N mat the proceedings OF the ma
J"Il'F OF the court We're irregular, that
-"Iilllial Schley's rights have been
H"lli1leed and his testimony in many
particulars not considered and that the
'lrlice is absolutely insufficient ia
AAslain the opinion.
hr. Croker Coming Home.
ff"ilch Lick, Ind, Dec. 19.-Richard
\. '"hrr and party will leave for New