The Savannah morning news., 1902-01-31
cept. to some extent, his own flagship,

cept. to some extent, his own flagship,
the Brooklyn.
The comment at this point contains
number of extracts from the testi-
mony to sustain this contention. TAX
ing the Brooklyn's signal book, it is
stated that this showed that the Brook
lyn gave only the two orders, Clear
for action" and "Close up"-"A meager
record, but it is the whole story"
Cite Schley's Testimony.
The comment insists that the order
Close up was not seen by any shin
| other than the Oregon, unless, perhaps,
the Texas. and that it exercised no
Influence whatever upon any vessel of
the squadron. They also quote Ad-
miral Schleys testimony that the
Brooklyn's charge was made in accord
ance with the original plan.
OF the order "Close up" they say:
so this order, the second of the two,
signalled from the Brooklyn during
the battle off Santiago to the Ameri-
can fleet was really formal also, and
was given in accordance with Samp-
sons original plan of battle which re-
CURED closing up with a view of sink
ing the Spanish vessels in the entrance.
Surprising as this is, it is shown by
Admiral Schley's own sworn testi-
mony, and is corroborated by the time
and circumstances under which the
signal was made. 1t is even more sur
prising, but it appears to be a fact,
that Admiral Schley issued no further
feet order during the progress of the
BATTLE"
The commentators next state:
If Commodore Schley was in abso-
lutte command during the battle, and if
he made any use of his authority, he
must have exercised some control over
some of the vessels participating,
whereupon they take up in detail the
testimony of the commanding officers
on this point, and say:
Wainwright, of the Gloucester, said
he saw no orders from the Brooklyn;
Taylor, of the Indiana, said he saw no
signals from the Brooklyn; Evans, of
the Iowa, said of the Brooklyn, L never
saw any signal from her. l did not
maneuver in obedience to any signals
from the Brooklyn the commanding
officer of the Texas is dead, but the
officers testimony make it clear that
that ship received no orders.
Did Not Direct other ships.
Speaking of this ship, the commen-
tators say:
The question is not so much one of
possible credit to, but of possible CEN
sure of Admiral Schley, in connection
with the work of the vessel in the bat
tie of Santiago. The plain truth is
that Admiral Schley did not, during
the battle, in any way direct or control
the splendid performances of the Glou-
cester and the three battleships In
diana. Iowa and Texas. The officers
in command of these ships neither re-
ceived nor obeyed a solitary order
from him."
Next the commentators turn their
attention to what they declare were
persistent efforts by Schley's attorneys,
to show that in some manner the Ore
gon, at least. was under his orders dur
ing the battle, first by answering the
signal "CloSe up" and afterward by
firing her 13-inch guns under signal
from the Brooklyn, and they say But
the attempt. as the testimony to be
quoted below shows. was a failure. IS
They quote therefore passages from
Capt. Clark's testimony in which he
said IN regard to the order "Close up"
THAT was a standing order in the
squadron, to attack the enemy at once
if they appeared. and to keep the heads
of the ships always towards the en-
trance"
AS to the alleged order from the
Brooklyn, directing the Oregon to fire
her thirteen-inch guns, the commenta-
tors again quote from Capt. Clark S
testimony, where, when asked if the
guns were fired in pursuance of an or
der from the Brooklyn, the Captain
said: mo, sir; I fired them after de-
liberating with the officers" and 'if
they .(the Brooklyn) made a signal, 1
did not see it,
The comment closes in the following
words:
"The contention that the magnificent
work of the Oregon, or any part of 1t,
was done under orders from the Brook
lyn, or that the Oregon received and
obeyed even a single order from Com
modore Schley from the time the Span
ish ships were sighted to the time of
the surrender of the Colon, which sur
render may fairly be taken as the close
of the battle, must be abandoned, and
with it goes the last peg upon which
to hang the pretense of a claim that
during the battle of Santiago Commo-
dore Schley effectively exercised any
of the functions of a commandments
chief.
Did Not Control the Fleet.
"The weight of the testimony is to
the effect that the Commodore con-
trolled the movements of his flagship,
the Brooklyn, well with the exception
of the loop. But it also shows, not
negatively, but affirmatively and be-
yond question. that he did not control
the operations of the fleet in general
on that day.
"The plain truth of the matter, there
fore, developed for the first time un-
der the searchlight of this inquiry, al
though quite incidentally, is that so
far as the Gloucester, the Iowa, the
Indiana, the Texas and the Oregon
are concerned, not the stroke Of pro-
pelIer blade not the touch of a helm,
not the firing of a shot, was done un-
der the direction or by the orders of
Admiral Schley during the memorable
battle"
san STORY OF MARINES.