The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1902-01-14
A REVIEW OF THE sCHLEY NATTER.

6AIK0G OF IN bn0 past SIX mOh6AS as
the Sohley trouble. 1t looks as if it
will never be settled, for the Court
of Inquiry has succeeded only in
making bad matters worse.
Il may not be unwise TO outline
briefly the progress of the case to
date It began, of course, with a
little dispute between Sohley's
friends and Simpsons friends as to
which was entitled 80 the glory or
TO the greater part of the glory of
the naval battle of Santiago, July,
1898, when the Spanish fleet was de-
stroyed.
Sampson, the superior officer, 1t
will be remembered, was absent at
the time of the fighting, and on
Schley, as next in command, fell the
responsibility of overseeing the
work. And the victory was so com
plete that the people came to the
conclusion that Sohley must have
done this work we'll and they hon
ored him accordingly. And they
honored Sampson less than they
would other wise have done because
he seemed inclined TO give so little
credit to Schley When Congress
met, both Sohley and Sampson were
promoted, but Sohley was put
slightly higher in rank than Sampson
The Navy Department, however,
and the larger number of the prOmi-
nent navy officials, seem TO have been
all the while in sympathy with
Sampson. When a medal oommemo-
rating the battle was prepared,
SIMPSONS image and superscriptiOn
adorned it. When the prize money
was paid, Sampson was given the
lions share-but this, we believe,
could not have been otherwise as the
law now stands.
All this, h0 wever, might not have
resulted in serious trouble, had not
q third-grade historian, Edgar s
MaclaY, prepared a history of the
navy, in which he branded Schley Is
u coward and poltroon. Sohley, of
course, onuld remain silent no longer
He demanded that the secretary of
the Navy appoint a Curt of In
quiry 80 investigate the charges,
which charges the NAVY Department
arranged under ten counts. But al
the publ understood it, the charge
thas outweighed all the others was
M4clay's charge of cowardice.
Eyery one knows the result There
was not an iota of evidence TO sup
port shis gravest of the charges, and
it failed miserably. But on the
nine minor charges, Admirals Ben
ham and Ramsey pronounced Schley
guilty, and the multitude of these
little charges seems to have caused
manv TO forget that in spite of their
number, they have little 80 do with
the main issue, M4olav's charges of
cowardice and treacherv, that the
Curt was formed TO settle.
Moreover, Admiral De vey-whose
opinion, Scnley's friends insist, il
entitled TO more consideration than
that IF she other two members of
the Court, o. whom fe y of US ever
heard Def )re-says that Sohley's
conduct before the battle was not
vacillatIng or blamewOrthv. AID
miral Dewey als) added something
in the nature of a p0stscript TO his
opinion saying that Admiral S hley
was in command at the battle of
Santa 20 and entitled TO the glory of
that victory. Without regard TO it's
truth, this seems to have been out
of place, because the Court was not
called on TO Investigate or discuss
that point
The matter then went TO the SEQ
rotary of the Navy, who approved
the findings of the majority of the
Court, that is 81 say, of Benham ano
Ramsey.
In the next act, General Miles,
commanding the army, came IN the
scene and gave out Il newspaper in
tervie endorsing the views of Ad-
miral Dewey. Before the curtain
fell, Eihu Root, Secretary of War,
appeared by direction of President
Roosevelt and severely reprimanded
Gen. Miles, as the head OF the army,
for meddling in navy squabbles.
This rebuke as we see it, was emf
nently right and proper. Perhaps it
should have been couohed in terms a
little more eunhonions and dinln-