The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1902-01-30
Leads all orth Carolina Dailes News andC CpcuIs

or modern times and one of the greatest
naval victories ever achieved by this
country.
1t is further stated that in asking
for q court the petitioner expected to
secure a judgment so final and conclu
sive as to terminate the controversy, and
that it was the duty of the court TO pass
upon the question of command.
Counsel next takes up the question OF
propriety and justice of Deweys opinion
that Commoder Schley was in absolute
command in the battle Of Santiago and
is entitled to the credit of the glorious
victory, and quote many excerpts from
the testimony to establish the correct
ness of this conclusion. II is recited that
Sampson signalled to disregard motions
commander in chief when he started
eastward that morning, thereby cOnferr-
ing command upon Schley. 1t is asserted
that the New York did not reach the
scene of the last surrender of Spanish
ships until one hour and tirteen min
utes after the battle ended, and that at
9:S5 on the morning of July 3rd the
New York was out of sight of every ship
of the blockadng squadron but one, maxi
ing it impossible for her to communicate
with any of them. Counsel also cites
Secretary Longs statement to the Sem
ate that Sampson was proceeding to-
wards Sibourney when the Spanish ships
emerged. under orders from the depart
nent TO confer with Shafter, and 1t is
reld that these orders detached him tenn
porariIy from his command, so that
Schley was actually in command at the
battle for the following reasons;
(A-By virtue of his rank as second in
command of the squadron before SAN
tiago.
(B)-By virtue of his rank as senior
line officer on the spot, authorized by
the regulations for the government OF
the navy of the United States to assume
command in such situations and to direct
the movements and efforts of all persons
in the navy present.
(C)-The absence from the scene of ac-
tion during every moment of actual
combat of the regularly appointed COM
mander- in-chief of the American forces
before Santiago.
(D)-The fact that, under orders OF
the department, the said commander-in-
chief had been temporarily detached
from duty as commander of the Ameri-
can forces before Santiago and assigned
by the discharge OF certain other duties
which orders he was obeying at the time
the battle began.
(E)-The fact that, being so engaged
in the discharge OF such detached duty
at the time the Spanish ships emerged
from the harbor of Santiago, the COM
mander-in-c chief found it impossible to
return to any point whence, personally
or by means of communication with the
ships actuall yengaged in the conflict, he
might resume his authority until after
the battle at every point of such arrival
had ended
(F)-The fact that whereas the COM
mander-in- chief could not and did not
exercise command over the squadron at
any time during the actual conflict, Com
modore Schley, as second in command of
the American forces before Santiago, and
as senior line officer on the spot during
every moment of actual battle, could and
did exercise authority and command over
the American forces actually engaged.
Further argument on this question of
command is to the effect that Cook and
Clark. the two ship captains present at
the surrender of the Colon, recognized
Schley's seniority and also that Samp-
sons order of battle" failed entirely as
soon as the Spanish squadron succeeded
in passing beyond the western most ex-
tremity of the American vessels All Of
which, il is submitted, goes to prove
conclusively that the individual opinion
of Dewey was eminently proper and
wholly justified by the evidence and the
naval regulations.
Exhibit B. elaborates and sustains the
statements made in the petition respect
ing the passage of the Flying Squadron
from Key West to Cienfuegos.
Exhibit C. maintains that the majority
of the court rejected all of Schley's testi-
mony and of his witnesses, and says;
That if this testimony was all false,
they should have so announced; and if
all or any part of it was true the said
applicant was entitled to the benefit of
it, and by declining to consider or pass
upon it they have deprived him ow his
common law and constitutional rights.