Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1901-10-10
>rss1 t~f -
must have known that Admiral Schleys

record was altogether too well
established to be affected by charges
of Cowardice at this late day.
| 1t is evident that Maclay himself
whose after thought appears to be con-
siderably superior tohis fore Thought
in it. when il was too late. The writ
cr has endeavorcd to secure Il copy
Of his book but without success. 1t is
evident that the edition has been
harvested. II the book ever makes its
appearance again il is safe to say that
it will be in a considerably modified
form. - &t es
Now that the testimony before the
court of Inquiry has made it evident
that any charges Of cowardice against
Admiral Syhlcy must fall Nat. it is
evident that the ffmrfis; Of Admiral
Sampson would like if possible to get
him into Il little better position re-
sardins his connection with Maclay's
history. The historian" himself has
stated that his book was submitted to
Sampson in the proof and published
with his approval. Sampson. in
newspaper interview. has admitted
such to be the fact.
Now comes one Col. Robert NJ.
Thompson of New York with a lengthy
ctat Ioax HOY "a
Sampson did not endorse the attack
upon Schley In speaking Of the proofs
he admits that Sampson did correct a
certain part Of them but adds that
las soon as he arrived at the part
| which contained the statement that
Schley was coward and a caitiff he
was very much angered and said the
statement was one the author had
no right to make. that it was unjust
officer in such ter ms, and declined to have
anything further to do with the
proofs"
To whom did Admiral Sampson cX-
press this anger" at the attack upon
Schley? Certainly not to Maclay the one
| man TO whom such an expression
| might doubtless would have re-
| suited in the suppression of this attack
upon brother officer which Thomp-
son assures us was regarded by Ad
miral Sampson as unjust and unfair"
Not only did Sampson fail TO ex-
| press any such views to Mr.. Maclay:
but as we have before stated that
gentleman has assured the public that
his book was not only submitted to the
Admiral the proof: but was published
| with his approval
Even Mr. Thompson in his thin and
labored defence of Sampson does not
| claim that he endeavored In any way
to dissuade Maclay from his attacl;
| upon Schlry. although the volume as
a whole was placed in his hands for
revision and criticism. For this We
are confident that the American people
| will justly hold him responsible.
| We have been at some length in re-
| viewing this unfortunate matter.
| Both Sampson and Schley are officers
of unquestioned courage and capacity.
| Both have made good records in the
service of their country; but both have
made their mistakes.
These under ordinary circumstances.
the country would he disposed to over
look; but now that professional jeal
| ousy has thrown them into relief. it is
| only fair that they be stated frankly.
| fully and without bias.
| The Journal is neither SChley
nor Sampson paper. 1t desires tina
| both of them shall have the full
credit that is their just due. So far
as the differences in issue we feel sure
| that the court OF inquiry will deal
| with them in a spirit of fairness as the
merits Of the case may appear in
evidence.