The sun., 1901-09-21

Him most Of the time"
"DescriEe the admirals manner in
this engagement"
Il hardly know how to answer that
question except 10 say that his manner
was that of commander in chief"
The judge advocate then asked,
'What impression did the admrars
manner iii that engagement make upon
you:"
Mr.. Rayner of counsel for Schley OBJ
iactcd to this question. ana after some
contention the question was with
drawn.
Judge Advocate Lcmly stated before
withdrawing the question that he con-
S,dered the point rs embraced in the
pircept and said that, while the task
WAS a diSagreeablc one. he considered
il his duty 70 press il and intimated
that he would do SO ut another time.
why did you not go in and destroy
The colon i'll the engagement on May
~" Judge Advocate l.cmly asked the
witness.
Because we were not ordered TO do
So" replied the witness.
witness Volunteers II Statement.
Eater on the witness volunteered the
statement. 81 think the Colon could
have been destroyed where She lay ut
anchor that day"
Admiral lIigginSun stated in reply TO
lt&~tiols from Captain I.cmly that
there We're no written orders, and =,
lin rs he could recall, the only verbal
orders were to ''go in"
Iii" judge advocate then offered Ad-
lral lIigglnSOn'S report OF the 9TH Of
August, saying the report had been
nndr in line Of duty. Judge Wilson Of
counsel for Admiral Schley said no OBJ
lection would he made, but that coun-
Sel for the applicant did not desire the
Gnoliiccted acceptance OF he report to
navrtr as Il precedent.
captain Lcmly announced flat he
had no further questions 70 ask Of Ad.
airal IIieGinson, ana counsel for Nd.
l4ital Schley stated they had no ques
tunS to put 1t was then stated hy
Napiain Lcmly that the court had s0mt
questions uf It's own to ask
These were written. ANA the first wa
concerning the elevation Of The gum
during the bunlhardmpnt Gf the Colol
~ May 81. lhr reply was that al frs
iilcy We're $50 fCpt and lattcfly g.UOt
fnet. The next question was as I,
Hllrthcr There WAS amy place Of Shel
trr near Santiago where the 'fiyin
Hndron' could have cealcd after it
arrival IL Santiago" Admiral Eliggir
Aon replied that Guantanamo was onl
lurty miles TO the east.
A Sensation III Court.
The third question, coming. MS it did
from tile court, created something of
sensation. which was added to by III
lnply. The question was. "Was ever
cllort mudr by .Nlmiral Schlcy to 4,
stroy OF capture the Spanish steame
Colon MS she lay at anchor in the ha,
bGr III Santiago between the 18th an
3lst of May?"
Object" object" "Ohicct." can
from each Of ADMIRAL Schley's counse
but before halt could be called IL
witness had replied, 30; | don't thin
il was
The question and the reply led 10
, legal controversy, Judge Wilson m
: Mr.. HayAcr bUth gave reasons fnr the
objections. They cuntcndcd that Il
: question called for the opinion of I'll
, witness, whereas only facts were II,
Y missiIlc.
] Judge Rayncr asked. May | ask I'll
court II according to the method {
: procedure here the court has ruled til;
4 we are not mt liberty to object to an
question ut all that may te askcd:"
= 10 this Admiral Dewey rcplict
: While this court is ordered to invest
t -atc ill tlc facts we have the right
) asls any question that will bring Of
!he facts. One of the charges again
Q Admiral Scllcy is whether or not evel
effort incumbent upon the coInmandil
( officer of the fleet under such circuu
@ stances was made by Commodol
Schley to capture or destroy the Spa
iSh cruiser Colon as she lay Mt anch,
( in the entrance to Santiago harb,
May p TO 81 inclusive. We have as
2 cd that question, and we have his CA
niral Higginson'sl opinion. This cou
I by the prccept is obliged to give {
opinion upon the conclusion of the i
yestigation. Now. in the opinion
the court aud in order to form o,
opinion we wanted Admiral IIiggi
sons opinion on that subject"
Judge Wilson'S Objection.
Judge wilson, understand that pr
cept, reading it through from end
end. to be simply this-that there sha