The National tribune., 1902-02-27
END OF THE sCHLEY MATTER.

The President has now put n practical
end to the Schley agitation by approving
/; the verdict of the Court of Inquiry and
diSmussing the appeal. In doing this he
has taken substantially the ground The
National Tribune has maintained from the
first, and is that occupied by all thinking
men who have studied the testimony and
are not blinded by personal resentment
or partisan prejudice.
The President carefully and impartially
reviews the essential part of the testi-
mony. He dismisses that portion relat-
ing to Schley's conduct before the battle
thus:
1T (the Court should have specifically
condemned the failure to enforce an eff
ficient night blockade at Santiago while
Admiral Schley was in command. On the
other hand, | feel that there is n reason
able doubt whether he did not move his
squadron with sufficient expedition from
port to port. The Court is q unit in con-
demning Admiral Schley's action On the
point where it seems to me he most grave
| ly erred; his "rctrograde movement when
he abandoned the blockade, and his dis
obedience of orders and miSStatementS of
facts in relation thereto. 1t should be re-
membered. however. that the majority of
these actions which the Court censureS
occurred five weeks or more before the
fight itself; and it certainly seems that if
Admiral Schley's actions were censurable
! he should not have been left rs second
in command under Admiral Sampson. His
Offcnses were in effect cOndoned when he
| was not called to account for them. Ad-
! miral Sampson. after the fight, in an Off
cial letter to the Department. alluded for
| the first time TO Admiral Schley's ''repre-
| hensible conduct six weeks previously. If
4 Il CL11
sible conduct Of a kind which called for
such notice from Admiral Sampson, then
Admiral Sampson ought not to have left
| him rs senior officer of the blockading
| squadron on the Sd Of July, when he
| (Sampson) steamed away on his proper
| errand of communication with Gen. Shat
! ter"
The President arrives Mt this conclu-
sion, which cannot be successfully dis
| puated for an instant:
"In short, the question as to which of
the two men, Admiral Sampson or Ad-
| miral Schley, was at the time in command
| is of merely nominal character. Tech
nically, Sampson commanded the fleet,
and Schley. as usual, the western divi-
sion. The actual fact, the important fact,
is that after the battle was joined not
helm was shifted. not a gun was fired.
not pound of steam was put on in the
engine room aboard any ship actively en-
gagged. in obedience to the order of either
Sampson or Schley, save on their own
| two vessels. 1t was Captains fight"
This is crushing but it is in absolute
accordance with weiI-known facts.
Continuing, the President says:
Therefore, the credit TO which each of
the two is entitled rests on matters apart
from the claim of nominal command over
flRag VsrFI II
was concerned. neither one nor the other
in fact, exercised any command. Samp-
son was hardly more than technically in
the fight. His real claim for credit rests
upon his work as Commander-in-C Chief:
upon the excellence of the blockade; upon
the preparedness of the squadron: upon
the arrangement of the ships head-on in
semicircle around the harbor. and the
standing orders in accordance with which
they instantly moved to the attack of the
Spaniards when the latter appeared. For
al these things the credit is his"
As to the much-dscussed 'loop" the
President says:
Admiral Schley is rightly cntitIed-as
is Capt. Cookie the credit of what the
Brooklyn did in the fight On the whole.
she did well: but / agree with the
unanimous finding of the three Admirals
who composed the Court of Inquiry, as to
tH' iobp. II SeIlOuSly HlHfTeu the Brook
lyn's otherwise excellent record, being in
fact the one grave mistake made by any
American ship that day. Had the Brook
iyn turned to the westward. that is, in
the same direction that the Spanish ships
were going. instead of in the contrary di-
rection, she would undoubtedly have been
in more dangerous proximity" to them. !
But it would have been more dangerous |
for them as well as for her, This kind of
danger must not be too nicely weighed by |
those whose trade it is to dare greatly for |
the honor of the flag. Moreover, the dan
ger was certainly not as great as that |
which, in the SelfSame moment menocnd
Wainwright's fragile craft as he drove |
forward against the foe. 1t was not. in |
my judgment, as great as the danger to |
which the Texas was exposed by the turn |
as actually made. 1t certainly caused |
both the Brooklyn and the Texas materi- |
ally to lose position compared to the fee |
ing Spanish vessels. But after the loop |
had once been taken Admiral Schley |
handled the Brooklyn manfully and well. |
She and the Oregon were thencefOrth the |
hcadmost of the American vessels
though the Iowa certainly, and seemingly !
the Texas also, did rs much in hammer
ing to standstlll the Viscaya. Oquendo |
and Teresa; while the Indiana did all her |
eastward position and crippled machinery |
permitted. In the chase of the Colon the |
Brooklyn and Oregon share the credit be-
tween them"
The President takes up the case as to
ono Of the unrewarded real heroes of the
battle, and says:
Under such circumstances it seems to
me that the recommendations of Presi- |
dent Mckinley were eminently proper
and that so far as Admirals Sampson
and Schley We're concerned il would have
been unjust for him to have made other
recommendations. Personally | feel that
in view of Capt. Clark's long voyage in
the Oregon and the condition in Which he
brought her to the scene of service ms
well as the way in which he actually
managed her before and during the fight.
it would have been well to have given
him the same advancement that was
given Wainwright. But, waiying this.
II is evident that Wainwright was en-
titled TO receive more than any of the
other commanders: and that il was lust
TO Admiral Sampson that he should re-
cciye greater advance in numbers than
Admiral Schley-there was nothing done
in the battle that warranted any unusual
reward for either. In short, as regards
AdmiralS Sampson and Schley, | find that
President Mckinley did substantial ius-
tice, and that there would be no warrant
for reversing his action"
This will be the last word in this con-
trOyersy for all but those who wage a per-
petual quarrel with history.
LAST Sunday some of the ministers of