Barre evening telegram. (Barre, Vt.) 1898-19??, 1902-01-30
7HE SMILEY APPEAL.
What Admiral Says In His Petition
to the President.
DEWEY FINDINGS HIS PLEA,
He Asks For Review ON Three
Grounds. In Each Case Baninx
His Request On what Hero
Of Manila Reported.

NaSnnStCn, Jan. ou.-l ne navy Ce-
partment has issued the following
statement. making public Admiral
Schley's appeal 10 the president:
| Admiral Schlcy appeals to the president
| as the chief executive and Ommander in
| chief of the army and navy, and he asks
] that the president review the findings Of
| the court. He asks this on three grounds,
| in each case basing his appeal on the find
ings of Admiral Dewey. as opposed to the
ma iority report. These three grounds are
set out compendiously in the petition,
which is signed by Admiral Schley and
Messrs. Rayner, Parker and league of his
counsel. Attached to the petition are
three eXhibits-A. r and Coach made
/ up of copious extracts from the testimony
taken by the court of inquiry and intend
I'd to confirm the statements of fact made
in the petition itself.
The first ground Of appeal is the holding
of Secretary Long in his Endorsement on
the courts findings that "the conduct OF
the court in making no finding and rem
derng no opinion on those questions that
Of command and of credit for the victory
is approved Indeed it could with pro
priety, take no other course evidence on
these questions during the inquiry having
been excluded by the court
Says Secretary Was La Error.
On this point the petition says that the
secretary Of the navy was in error in
stating that the court excluded testimony
to show that as Dewey said, Schley was
the senior officer in the battle of Santiago,
was in absolute command and entitled to
the credit due for the glorious victory
which resulted in the total destruction Of
the Spanish ships, The petition says:
And your petitioner. the applicant be-
fore said court of inquiry now files with
this petition an argument. together with
a resume of the testimony taken during
the inquiry in so far as 1t relates to the
question as to who was in command al
the battle of Santiago. in support OF his
plea that the presiding member of the
said court acted within his authority and
jurisdiction in reporting his opinion as
hereinbefore set forth and that the ma
jority members of the said court failed jn
the discharge of Il most important duty
devolving upon them under the precept in
that they did not report their opinion
upon the said question. that it was incum-
bent upon such majority members to con-
slider and determine the said question for
the reason that only by SO doing couS
they determine the propriety of the con-
duct OF the said Schley in said battle,
since. it being a fact that he did assume
command of the American forces therein
engaged, his action would, in the absence
Of the right and duty so to do, have been
highly censurable. and upon the questions
OF such right and duty and the propriety
of his conduct in the premises the said
Schley was entitled, under the precept, to
finding and an opinion from the ma.
jority members as well as from the minor
ity member of the said court. and your
petitioner respectfully requests that the
said argument and resume of testimony
be considered as part of his petition and
as the basis for his prayer for relief
Therefore the petitioner asks the presi-
dent to annul Secretary Longs indorse-
ment on this point and that he specifically
approve Admiral Deweys statement de-
claring that Schley was in command. He
says that only in this way can exact JUS
tee be done him under the precept.
Second Ground of Appeal.
,,-cond ground relates to the alleged
withdrawal Of the squadron at night
from Santiago bay and the character OF
the blockade and the propriety of Com
modore Schley's conduct in the premises
This was one of the points upon. which |
Admiral Dewey specifically dissented. !
The petition recites the findings of the |
court to the effect that the flying squad
ron did not withdraw at night and de- |
clares that by this statement the court |
ohviated the necessity of expressing its |
opinion as to whether or not close or
adequate blockade was established and |
the propriety of Commodore Schley's con-
under this specfication-the eighth-more |
than majority of all the witnesses were |
examined, and about one-third of the |
whole period of the inquiry was consum- |
ed in its consideration, yet "notwithstand |
ing the facts herein set forth, all of which |
appear upon the record of the said court, |
the concurring members thereof have fail |
ed utterly and entirely to discharge the |
most important duty imposed upon them
by the terms of the said specifica ton,
which duty was to report their opinion
upon the questions of whether or not
close or adequate blockade of said harbor
to prevent the escape of the enemys YES
sells therefrom was established and the
propriety of Commodore Schleys conduct
in the premises.
Therefore Admiral Schley asks the pres
dent to annul the secretary's Endorsement |
which makes valid the failure of the ma
ority members thereof to report their
opinion upon that portion of the said
'ighth specification" and it is also asked
hat there he substituted therefor Admiral
Dewey's holding 1.-The blockade of Santi-
'go was effective" Otherwise the petit
Toner declares that he will be without a |
hiding or opinion upon one OF the most |
specifications.
The Third Ground of Appeal.
The third ground recites Admiral Dewey's
pnion to the effect that the passing from
Aey west to ClenfuegoS was made by the |
lying squadron with all possible dispatch
aving in view the Importance of arriving
IF Cienfuegos with sufficient coal, that the
blockade of Cienfuegos was effective, that
he Adula was permitted to gain informa-
ion and finally that the passage from
'ienfuegos to a point off Santiago was
1ade with as much dispatch as possible
'hile keeping the squadron a unit The
ettion declares that this opinion, being |
t variance in certain points with the ma
ority opinion, is the only one justified by |
he evidence and facts before the court |
nd 1t is asked that the secretarys ap-
roval of the majority findings be set ,
side and annulled in each instance where |
is at variance with Admiral Dewey's
pinion. and that the latter's opinion t
hould be approved for the reasons here
'fore set out in the bill of exceptions filed |
18th the secretary of the navy. 1t is also |
sked that the president annul that por-
on of Secretary Longs Endorsement
hich states las to points on which the
residing member differs from the opinion
the majority of the court the opinion
the majority is approved" and that in
ace he substitute and approve the decla-
'tion of Admiral Dewey on these points
Dove referred to- connected with the
lssage from Key West to Cienfuegos |
IL h.. to-