The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1901-10-13
HOT WORDS FROM
RAYNER TO LEMLY
Continued from First Page.)
Santiago. This dispatch was as folio

Santiago. This dispatch was as follows:
United States Flagship New York, St.
Nicholas Channel, May q, 1898.
"Slr:-Every report and particularly
daily confidential reports received at Key
West from Havana state Spanish Squad
ron has been in Santiago de Cuba from
the 10Th to the 18th instant inclusive.
The 10Th being the date of the last report
received You will please proceed with
all possible dispatch to Santiago to block
ade that port. If on arrival there you
receive positive, information of the Span
ish ships having left you will follow them
in pursuit.
Very respectfully,
"W. T. SAMPSON"
Mr.. Hanna: what is the first positive
orGer?"
Mr.. Rayner: May 27th''
Mr.. Hanna: did he receive it on the
27th?"
RAYNER THROWS BOMB.
Mr.. Rayncr: HE never received it on
the 9th (after being prompted by Ad-
miral Schley). He got it on June TO-
Mr.. Hanna How is it possible then
he can be affected by an order after all
tnat lapse or time z!
Mr.. Rayner THAT is Just what we
want to prove, that he had no orders
except those contained in dispatches num-
bers and 81
Mr.. Rayner then repeated his desire
to offer the dispatch of May 9th in evil
dence, and after colloquy between Mr..
Rayncr and Judge Advocate Lemly, Mr..
Hanna remared that there was no objcc
4 -
obviously intended to reflect on per-
son who is not under inquiry
To this Mr.. Rayner responded that it
was not intended to reflect on any one,
but it was intended "to prevent re-
Fiction on Commodore Schley." 1t was
decided that the dispatch was already in
evidence and Mr.. Hanna took the witness
for redirect examination. He began by
asking if he knew the reason for the lapse
OF five or six days between the sending of
dispatches by the Hawk and the Wasp.
To this inquiry Mr.. Rayner objected and
there was quite a prolonged argument on
the part of counsel on both sides as to
the admissibility of the question.
Mr.. Hanna stated in the course of his
argument that the matter could be fully
explained, but said that if the court OBJ
jected he would not press the matter,
whereupon Admiral Dewey remarked:
"You better not ask that question"
Mr.. Hanna: 81 will ask whether the
witness does not know something about
it. / think / can develop facts which he
does not know as to the circumstances
under which they were sent
Admiral Dewey: 'As have stated be-
fore, we want facts-facts.'
Mr.. Hanna: Il will say. if the court
has no objection, that the question |
have in mind is whether or not this order
of May 21st this memorandum, was sent
under circumstances Of exigcncy as a
hurried order and that that fact was
communicated to the man who carried it
and that ne was instructed to deliver it
as such and to SO inform Commodore
Schley."
Mr.. Rayner: "You have to prove that
Commodore Schley was informed. What
was the occasion of a hurried order? 1t
could not have been hurried very much.
This is an important branch of the case.
These are official communications and
we ought not to be bound here by what
took place hundreds of miles away from
where we were. Here are the dispatches
Why any verbal testimony on this? 1t
opens the whole field in this case. If you
can go into it we certainly ask to do So
The incident was closed by the with
drawal of the question.
At this stage af the proceedings Captain
Lemly introduced as a part of the record
two letters from Commodore Schlcy to
Admiral Sampson, Doth dated May %,
1895, the first saying that he was by no
means satisfied that the Spanish Squadron
was not at Cienfuegos, and the second
telling of the information he had re-
ceive through the British steamer Adula.
He said that he, presented them because
they bear upon this matter of the re-
ceipt of dispatches.
RAYNER AND LEMLY CLASH.
A somewhat exciting incident here arcIo
between Judge Advocate Lemly and Mr..
Il in11 ton 4 10 ndpr