The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1901-10-03

your official report of July 3, copy Of
the notes of said action?'
Yes, sir.
''Where did you obtain this copy?'
From the executive officer, Lieut. Har-
low"
did you at the time know whether
there were any differences between this
copy as attached to your official report
and the copy as it appears in your log
book?"
Eyes, sir, knew there were some slight
differences"
From whom did you learn that there
were these differences and was any ex-
PLANTATION made of this fact to your
When was writing my report of the
action of July 3, l said to Lieut. Har-
low, I desire copy of your notes taken
during the action to accompany NV re-
port to the admiral He replied as near
as now remember it, Those notes were
taken for the representative of a news
paper on board the Brooklyn and | Will
nave to make some changes in Them l
then SAID, oh, very well, l wish the
notes TO go with my report He after
wards submitted to me the notes, written
IN script which 1 read over and inclosed
in my report to the admiral
Mention has been made of the copv of
the notes sent to the Brooklyn which
were printed on board that vessel DO
you recognize that paper?" (handing him
| printed pamphleD
nave seen a copy of this before If
am not mistaken, several were sent to
| the Vixen''
what does it purport to be?'
. An account of the engagement with
the spanish squadron as seen from the
| United States ship Vixen, July 3. 1888
onlteo states ship Brooklyn flagship
AZ thls point Judge Advocate Lemly
| Oh the harlow notes with the copy print
cd on board the Brooklyn; with the result
OIL showing that the notes had been
| changed before being printed so as to
MAKE the account say that at 1906 the
TWO Leading ships of the enemy. bore
| Wen on the Brooklyn's starboard quar-
| ter, instead of on her starboard bow
and that at Has the Brooklyn was one
| point on port bow instead of zone point
on Starboard bow
me court then adjourned for luncheon
When the court reconvened after lunch
| con, Capt. Lemly continued his question
ing OF Commander Sharp concerning the
changes IN the notes made by Lieut. Har-
| low, as follows:
| Judge Advocate-In the entry made In
your log. hour 1915, the two leading ships
! OF the enemy as well are given on the
Starooard bow of the Brooklyn, are they
not?
Commander Sharp (reading)-'The two
leading enemy's ships were well on her
starboard, bow" yes, sir
Now in the copy printed on the Brook
iyn what is the bearing of those ships?'
commander Sharp (reading)-"The two
leading ships were well on her starboard
quarter, it says quarter here and
DOW in the note of the Vixen log
Then the Brooklyn is placed further
ahead by the printed copy of the log, is
she not?"
Either further ahead or the Spanish
vessels further astern, yes, SIR
In the entry made at 11:45 a. m. il an
pears from your log that the Brooklyn
bore one point on the port bow of the
Vixen, does it not?'
Commander Sharp (reading from the
notes as appended to the Vixens log)-
The Brooklyn was one po.nt on the quar-
ter bow, distance about three miles, in
the points, Brooklyn on the quarter bow.
| distance about three miles,
What is the effect of the difference
between the copy of the log book and
notes?''
THE copy of the Brooklyn's printed
notes would put the Brooklyn further in
shore or the Vixen further out, sir, as
the case might be-
Cross -examining the witness Can't.
Parker ELECTED from him the statement
that the print of the word ''starboard'' in
Lieut.. Harlow's entry for 11:45 as printed
in the Brooklyn print of the notes, cor
| responded with the official print as given
III the appendix, that word being given
in place of the word port as originally
stated in the notes.
Capt. Parker also called the attention
of the witness to the entry in Lieut.. Har-
lows notes wherein he says: '11:15, the
Iowa is gaining the Massachusetts,
and asked if he had read the notes at the
time, also calling his attention to the
fact that the Massachusetts was then at
Guantanamo.
Commander Sharp replied that he did
not read the notes. but he thought he
must have overlooked this no tatioL
Capt. Parker then asked whether it was
not true that all the notes in the original
copy, appearing in the print of the Brook
Ign, had not been made to Lieut.. Har-
low after he delivered the transcript to
him, Capt. Sharp, for Admiral Schley
Capt. Sharp replied that he did not
think so.
Mr.. Hanna-You can hardly remember
at this time whether the Brooklyn was on
| the starboard or port bow:
Yes, my impression is that she was
ON THE PORT BOW.
| After we had passed Acerraderos, stand
| ing to westward my impression is that
| the Brooklyn was on her port bow during
| the entire run to the westward until she
| turned in at Rio Tarquino''
Capt. Parker-Now, knowing that fact
| may it not be possible that, before you
sent those notes on board, or took them
| on board to the commodore, the word
| ''starboard" may have been changed into
| port" or vice versa? If you read the
| notes over before you took them to the
| commodore, and saw any inaccuracies or
| things that ought to have been changed,
| you probably would have changed them,
| would you not?
II am afraid did not read them over
| as carefully as I should have done"
| THAT is an error undoubtedly about the