Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1902-10-28
THE QUESTION OF COMMAND.
.sampson-Schley Controversy in the
Supreme Court.

There was brief reminder of the Samp-
son-schley controversy in the United States
Supreme Court yesterday afternoon in con-
nection with the case entitled THE United
States VS.. W. T. Sampson, Rear Admiral,
and Others" involving the distribution of
prize money because of the capture of the
Spanish cruiser Infanta Maria Teresa in
the battle off Santiago. The case came I'D
for argument, and before the argument had
begun Chief Justice Fuller suggested the
necessity Of substituting some other name
for that of Admiral Sampson, in view OF
the admirars death.
Assistant Attorney General Hoyt who
was present for the government, responded
20 the effect that the parties to the con-
troversy had supposed that the court might
make suggestion later In the case and
that for the present the argument could
proceed upon the case under its present
title.
The court manifested a disposition to de-
muir to this suggestion, urging that the
name of some other naval officer could be
used-"that," he said, 'of Admiral Schley
or some one else"
The name of Admiral Schley did not APP
pear to meet with the approval Of the at
torneys present representing the naval OFF,
GERS. One of them Mr.. James H. Hayden,
responded that there would be some diff
Guilty about making a substitution. IT."
he ,said there is to be substitution there
remains but one man who was an officer
OF the fleet, and that Is Capt. Chadwick,
who was Admiral SIMPSONS chief of staff.
Admiral Schleys duties were limited to
the command of a division Of the fleet
Il had thought 1t possible responded the
Chief Justice, that 1t might be a question
Of rank or title
To this suggestion Mr.. Hayden replied:
"If Admiral Sampson had not been pres
ent and In command then Admiral Schley
would have been in command Of the feet,
hint he yunC op6 ",
Justice Harlan interrupted. present
where?" he asked. The Chief Justice SEEM
ed quite interested over the turn the case
had taken. His hands were raised, as was
also his voice, slightly, when he asked: us
| that point involved in this case?' Being
assured that it was not, the Chief Justice
| then repeated his request that a name
| should be substituted for that Of the ad-
miral, but he permitted the argument to
go on pending the consideration of the
| point.
The court granted the first writ Of GER
| tiorari which has been allowed during the
present term. The case Ia that of the
| Northern Pacific Railroad Company vs.
| Louise Adams. Mrs. Adams is the widow
| OF an attorney who lost his life while trav-
| cling on the Northern Pacific as a passen-
ger. Suit for damages was brought, and
| the circuit court Of appeals for the ninth
/ circuit decided in favor of Mrs. Adams
and assessed damages at $4,000. The ac-
| tion of the Supreme Court today will tn
| sure the review OF the case by that court.
| Leave to the state of Louisiana to file a
bill OF complaint against the state of Mis-
| sissippi for the determination of the water
boundary between the two states was also
| granted by the court. The petition for leave
| was filed last Monday. The question is
| rendered important by the presence of oys-
/ ter beds.
| The court affirmed the decision of the
| United States circuit court for the third
| circuit in the case of J. M. Robinson & Co.
| VS.. John G. Belt. The case originated in
4 Ind ian Tor and Inv rod ffnr1
| of preference among creditors in bank
| ruptcy proceeding.