The sun., 1902-02-20


Conduct After the Loop Was Completed
WASHINGTON. Feb. i9-The following
is President Roosevelt's answer to the ap-
peal of Rear Admiral Schley for rehearng
Of his case.
WHITE HOUSE, Feb. IS, 1902
! have received the appeal OF Admiral
Schley and the answer thereto from the
Navy Department. | have examined both
with the utmost care az well as the pre-
ceding appeal to the Secretary Of the Navy.
l have read through all the testimony taken
before the court and the statements OF
the counsel for Admrals Sampson and
Schley; have examined all the official re-
ports Of every kind in reference to the
Santiago naval campaign, copies Of the
logbooks and signal books. and the testi-
mony before the Court Of Claims, and have
also personally had before me the four
surviving Captains Of the five ships, aside
from those OF the two Admirals, which were
actively engaged at Santiago
1t appears that the court OF inquiry was
unanimous in its findings Of fact and unani-
nous in its expressions OF opinion on most
Of its findings of fact. No appeal is made
to me from the verdict of the court on these
points where IL was unanimous. ] have,
however, gone carefully over the evidence
on these points also ! am satisfied that on
the whole the court did substantial justice.
1t should have specifically condemned
the failure TO enforce an efficient night
blockade at Santiago while Admiral Schley
was in command. On the other hand,
feel that there is a reasonable doubt whether
he did not move his squadron with suffi-
,,apt aNnaHitinn from mort. Ihe
court is a unit in condemning Admiral
Schley's action on the point where it seems
to me he most gravely erred; his -retro-
grade movement" when he abandoned the
blockade, and his disobedience Of orders and
misstatement Of facts in relation thereto.
It should be remembered. however, that
the majority Of these actions which the
court censures occurred five weeks or more
before the fight itself; and il certainly seems
that II Admiral Schley's actions were CEN
surabe he should not have been left as
second in command under Admiral Samp-
son His offences were in effect condoned
when he was not called to account for them.
Admiral Sampson, after the fight, In an
official letter to the Department alluded
for the first time 20 Admiral Schley's repre-
hensible conduct six weeks previously.
II Admiral Schley was guilty Of r. prehensible
conduct OF kind which called for such
notice from Admiral Sampson. then Ad-
miral Sampson ought not 10 have left him
az senior officer Of the blockading squadron
on the 81 Of July, when he (Sampson)
steamed away on his proper errand OF
communication with Gen. Shafter.
WHO COMMANDED AT SANTIAGO.
We can, therefore, for our present pur-
poses dismiss consideration OF 80 much OF
the appeal as relates TO anything except
the battle. As regards this, the point raised
in the appeal is beween Admiral Sampson
and Admiral Schey as 20 which was in COM
mand, and as to which was entitled 70 the
the credit, IL either OF them was really
entitled TO any unusual and preeminent
credit by any special exhibition OF genius,
skill and courage. The court could have
considered both Of these questions, but az
a matter OF fact il unanimously excluded
evidence offered upon them, and through
it's President announced its refusal 10 hear
Admiral SIMPSONS side at all; and in view
OF such exclusion the majority OF the court
acted with entire propriety in not express
ing any opinion on these points. The mat
ter has however, been raised by the Presi-
dent of the court Moreover, II is the point
upon which Admiral Schley in his appeal
laws most stress, and which he especially
asks me TO consider. / have therefore
carefully investigated this matter also.
and have informed myself upon II from the
best sources of information at my COM
mand.
The appeal OF Admiral Schley TO me Is
not, as TO this. the chief point he raises,
really an appeal from the decision OF
the court of inquiry. Five sixths OF
the appeal is devoted 10 this question
Of command and credit; that IL. TO
matter which the court of inquiry did not
consider 1t is In effect an appeal from
tho action Of President Mckinley three
years ago when he sent In the recommenda-
tions for promotion for the various officers
connected with the Santiago squadron.
basing these recommendations upon his
estimate OF the credit to which the offioerS
were respectively entitled What i have
20 decide, therefore, Is whether or not
President Mckinley did injustice in the
matter This necessarily involves oom-
parison OF the actions Of the different COM
manders engaged. The exhaustive official
reports of the action leave little 70 be
brought out anew; but as the question OF
Admiral Simpsons right 10 be considered
in chief command which was determined
in his favor by President Mckinley. and
later by the Court OF Claims, has never
hitherto been officially raised. | deemed II
best 70 secure statements Of the command
ers Of the FIVE ships (other than the Brook
lyn and New York. the flagships Of tho two
Admirably which were actively engaged in
the hght.
ApMIRAL PHILIPS TESTIMONY.
Admiral Philip is dead. quote eI-
tracts from his magazine article on the
fisht, written Immediately after 1t occurred.
closing with an extract from his letter ~
the Secretary Of the Navy Of Feb 27. isss;
It was the blockade that made the battle
possible. The battle was . direct oonse-
quenoe Of the blookAdA and upon the method
and effectiveness Of tho blockade was very
largely dependent the issue OF the battle.
Under the orders OF Admiral Samp-
son the blockade was conducted with Q suo-
cess sIempllned by the result
whcn the spanish Admiral at last made bis
dash 10 esospe, we were ready-ready With
our men. With our guns and with our engines.
IL wa onlv n few minutes After yA