The daily morning journal and courier., 1902-02-20
Decision of President Roose- veIt on the Appeal of
 Admiral SchIey.
QUESTION FULLY REVIEWED
M'KINLEY,S 1C1ION IN THE MAT
 TER SUSTAINED.

Opinions of the Commanders of ths
 Fight Given to Disprove schley'n
 Claim Mild Criticism for Sampson fon
 Not Relieving sohIey if the Latter
 duct"-schIey Both Criticised and
 Praised-FauIt Found With Loop m d
 Retrograde Movement-Hearty Com
 currenoe in Recommendation That N O
 Further Action be Taken.
 Washington, Feb. 19.-President
 Roosevelt tonight gave out his decision
 on the appeal of Admiral Schley from
 the finding of the majority of the court
 of inauriy. The full text of the decision
 follows:
 White House, Feb IS, 1902.
 I have received the appeal of Admiral
 Schley and the answer thereto from the
 Navy Department, I have examined
 both with the utmost care, as well as
 the preceding appeal to the Secretary of
 the Navy I have read through all the
 testimony taken before the court and the statements of the counsel for Admi-
 rals Sampson and Schley have exam
 ined all the official reports of every kind in reference to the Santiago naval cam paign, copies of the logboolzs and signal IL h1f In court of claims, and have also personal ly had before me the four surviving captains of the five ships, aside from those of the two admirals, which were actively engaged at Santiago.
 It appears that the court of inquiry was unanimous in it's findings of fact and unanimous in it's expressions of opinion on most of it's findings of fact No appeal is made to me from the yer dict of the court on these points where it was unanimous. I have, however, gone carefully over the evidence on these points also. I am satisfied that on the whole the court did substantial justice It should have specifically con demned the failure to enforce an eff cient night blockade at Santiago while Admiral Schley was in command. On the other hand, I feel that there is reasonable doubt whether he did not move his squadron with sufficient eXpe- dition from port to port. The 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 or ders and misstatement of facts in rela tion thereto. It should be remembered, | however, that the majority of these ac- | tions which the court cenSures occurred | five weeks or more before the fight it. self; and it certainly seems that if Ad- miral Schley's actions were censurable | he should not have been left as second | in command under Admiral Sampson. | His offenses were in effect condoned | when he was not called to account for | them Admiral Sampson, after the fight, in an official letter to the depart ment alluded for the first time to Admi- ral Schley's ''reprehensible conduct" six weeks previously. If Admiral Schley was guilty of reprehensible conduct of a kind which called for such notice from Admiral Sampson then Admiral Sampson ought not to have left him as senior officer of the blockading squad ron on the Sd of July when he (Samp- son) steamed away on his proper CT rand of communication with General Shafter
 We can therefore for our present pur- poses dismiss consideration of so much of the appeal as relates to anything ex- cept the battle. As regards this, the point raised in the appeal is between Admiral Sampson and Admiral Schley, as to which was in command, and as to which was entitled to the credit, if either of them was really entitled to any unusual and pre-eminent credit by any special exhibition of genius, skill and courage. The court could have both of these questions, but as a matter of fact it unanimously ex- rluded evidence offered upon them, and it's president announced it's re- fusal to hear Admiral Sampsons side at all; and in view of such exclusion ! the majority of the court acted with en- tire propriety in not expressing any opinion on these points. The matter nas. however, been raised by the pres dent of the court. Moreover, it is the point upon which Admiral Schley in , lis appeal lays most stress, and which , le especially asks me consider I Y nave therefore carefully investigated ! his matter also, and have informed z myself upon it from the best sources of Q at my command. z The appeal of Admiral Schlev to me S not, as to this.- the chief point he I discs. really an appeal from the deci- q ion of the court of inquiry. Five T yxths of the appeal is devoted to this o question of command and credit; that e S. to matter which the court of inquiry o lid not consider. It is in effect an ap- r ,eal from the action of President Me | Iinley three years ago when he sent in t he recommendations for promotion for | he various officers connected with the t santiago squadron, passing these recom- upon his estimate of the redit to which the officers were reSpeC- Il
 fCOntinued on Second Page Is,