New-York tribune., 1901-09-13

the stand. The witness explained the nature Of
his duties in securing news from the Charosiown
Navy Yard. He then detailed the conversation he
is said TO have had with Admiral Howison. TINS
occurred. he said, in the commandants oiiice' ana
while it had been given with the distinct under
standing that IL should be puphshed lhere was 4o
injunction of secrecy.
Publications had begun TO appear concerning the
credit for the victory This had been referred TO Oh
the witnesses visit TO Admiral Howison. and IN
reply the admiral said the witness testhec that
Sampson entitled to the credit OF the victory dI
Santiago Admiral Howison described the duties
which had devolved on Sampson. ana no" EesseiS
had been placed off the entrance or the haroor 10
guard against the escape of the spanish Meet Inc
witness said Admiral Fowison stated that II the
American feet had been defeated Admiral Sampson
would have been asked why ii had occurred Mr..
Frost said he had suggested that the public seemed
disposed to give the credit to Sch!ey In response
he testified, Admiral Howison went on TO say that
SIMPSONS standing as an officer aAd as man was
greatly superior to that Of Schley
What he said,'' continued the witness IN
clined me 10 the belief that ne had use for Ad-
ruiral Schley The witness also gave in detail the
circumst ances leading up TO the publication.
ON cross-examination the precept was shown TO
him. and ne was asked by Solicitor Hanna If Ad-
miral Howlson had expressed an opinion on the
pouts in the precept. The witness thought he mad
not az many points in the precept were not In
yolved in the conversation. Inc "lthess doHeIeH
strictly to his first statement
on redirect examination Mr.. Raynor asked;
What was Admiral Howison's manner during
his conversation with you?
He spoke of Schley in what l would call
sneering manner" replied the witness
Occasionally in the examination of this witness
there was a slight tilt between counsel. but on the
whole there was little objection 10 the lines
on which the evidence was developed
CONVERSATION ON A STEAMER.
There had been no announcement OF the names of
4,,t- tlrSF. ffaf.
Mr Frost's testimony to Admiral Howisons at
titude toward Admiral Schley. and considerable In
erest was manifested when the next witness, Will
tam +. Spon OF the firm OF Spon Chamberlain.
booksellers and publishers in New-YoTk and Lon
don appeared. Mr.. SpOn testified that he had been
a passenger the steamer Minneapolis. which had
sailed from London for New-York on October IL.
1900 and that Admiral Howison also had been a
passenger on the same vessel on this voyage The
witness related that day the Sampson -Schley
controversy came up. and one man expressed him
| self as favorable to Admiral Sampson. Mr.. Spon
had taken the opposite side. and in his effort "a
| show that Admiral Sampson was not a fit man for
| his place had remarked that the admiral had been
the last member Of the Board OF Ordnance TO agree
! to the of smokeess powder by the navy. Con-
! tinuing Mr. Spon said that Admiral Howison came
within hearing of the conversation at this point,
| and, walking up to the group. said
II correct you; this is not You men do not
know what you talking about You don't
respected and looked up to. especially by the
younger members OF the navy"
The witness said that colloquy had fol-
| lowed after which Admiral Howison had said
| Anyhow, Schley should have been courtmar-
tailed He was the main of all this CON
troversy in the newspapers
| Mr.. spon added that Admiral Howison had
seemed much excited in his conversation. and that
! the other members OF the party had listened in
silence what ne had say. From his whole
manner" the witness went on. II inferred that he
! was a very violent partisan of Sampson. and cor
| respondngly prejudiced against Schey. He was
not content to correct me to Admiral Sampson
but seemed willing TO say bitter things. amos,
vindctivey. against Admiral Schey."
CALLED SCHLEY DISOBEDIENT
Mr.. Spon followed by Foster Nichols, OF
| Yonkers. n. y. which is Admiral Howlson's place
! Of residence. Mr. Nichols is Interested I'm nava
| publications. and in this capacity called Ad-
miral Howison on July last for the purpose of
curing from him notes for a biography Of the adm
! raj. He said that the day which the call was
made was very hot, and on that account the ad-
mlral had asked to be excused from granting al
Interview. Mr.. Nichols said that after this con
versation he produced n copy of the work which
| his house was getting out containing sketches
Of the leaders in the Spanish American War and
pictures Of Sampson and Schley The witness
said that at the sight Of Schey's picture Howisor
said Schey had business in the navy and added
that II Schiey in the English navy he would
have been put out for less cause than there is ir
his case.
81 asked" the witness continued. the reason
why Schley should have been put out. Admra
Howison replied. For disobedience of orders
asked why, II he disobeyed orders he was per
mitted to remain. The admiral replied Because
| he gave the excuse that he had to so to port &c
c"al; yet everybody knows that coaling at sea 4:
possible. "
The witness said he had expressed surprise al
Admiral Howison's attitude and that In reply the
admiral had said:
You wouldn't be surprised II you in touch
with the sentiment among naval officers
Witness said that in response to inquiry Ad
| miral Howison had explained the absence Of Ad
| miral Sampson from. the of action when the
Santiago naval battle occurred by saying:
The explanation is that there had been lack o
cooperation between the land and forces
and Sampson trying to harmonze them. TIL,
day on which the battle occurred was the last da
on earth when the Spanish feet should have beer
expected out
Mr.. Raynor at this point called the attention OF
| the court to the fact that the witnesses testi
| mony had not been answered. The letter Admira
| Howson had written to Acting Secretary Hacket
| had not been produced; neither had Admiral Howl
1 son been asked to testify. After reading from 2