New-York tribune., 1902-01-30

Lieutenant McCauley. Lieutenant Webster. Ensign
ant Commander Nicholson. Lieutsnant simpson
sr snd Asmra sehey
himself. In addition. counsel include the test,
quote portions of the argument to the court where
they were allowed to DISCUSS the ST9Ject or f1
amounted to formal entertainment and consid-
igated il to find the fact and report its opinion
thereupon."
WANTS THE CONTROVERSY ENDED
As to the general obligation the court to de-
termne this question of command. counsel declare
that they should have done So because;
The question has never been considered and de-
termined by body of competent jurisdiction hav-
ing before it all the facts and all the parties in
(b) That a doubt existing as to who was actually
in the navy Of the the Unite United states and among the
people at large controversy over this point which
eountenanced by your petitioner has waged for
the good of the service and to the hurt of those
most concerned in the said question.
your petitioner was made the object of most unjust
affecting his personal and public char
who sought to establish the fact that he did not
accusations he has suffered much Injury;
(dl =. That the said controversy brought about
ent and participating in said battle being denied
to grant those who serve it We'll in war Is
(e) That the said controversy only be ter
is due upon the rendition by a body Of competent
jurisdiction having before it all the facts and par
ties concerned. Of the decision upon this question
which decision shall be final and conclusive.
of the service by closing a depIorabIe contro-
yersy which now divides the service into hostile
factions: that. further. such decision will per-
petuate in history the true facts surrounding of
the greatest naval conflicts of modern times and
of the greatest naval victories ever achieved by
this country.
Ss2 That in asking for court to pass upon his
expected by such action and its consequences to
terminate the said controversy and relieve the ser
(h) That in this respect his desire was shared by
the Navy Department, which created the court and
% That under under the circumstances and conditions
the said controversy might be terminated. the
he 9a good ID o G erSe
served.
REASONS FOR CLAIMING COMMAND.
Counsel next takes up the question OF the pro-
priety and justice of Deweys opinion that Com
modore Schley was in absolute command the bat
tie OF Santiago and is entitled to the credit of the
glorious victory and quote many extracts from the
testimony to establish the correctness of this con-
cusion. 1t is reclted that Sampson sgnalled dis
regard motions commander-in-chief when he
started eastward that morning. thereby comforting
command on Schley. and the naval regulations
cited at length on this point 1t is asserted that
the New-York did not reach the scene of the last
surrender of Spanish ships until one hour and
thirteen minutes after the battle ended. and that
at s:S5 O'Clock on the morning of July the New
York was out of sight of every ship of the block
aiding squadron but one making it impossible for
her TO communicate with any of them Counsel
also cite Secretary Longs statement TO the Senate
that Sampson was proceeding toward Siboney
when the Spanish ships emerged. under orders
from the department TO confer with Shafter and it
is held that these orders detached him temporarily
from his command, so that Schley was actually in
command at the battle for the following reasons:
ta) BY virtue OF his rank as second in COM
SQUADRON
- %, by virtue Of his rank as senior line officer
IN the goyernment OF the navy Of the Jpted States
direct the movements and efforts OF all persons
In the navy present.
every moment OF actual combat Of G the Iesmiary
appointed commander r-n-chief OF the American
,,9, d The The fast that under orders Of the depart
Porariy detached from duty as Commander OF the
American forces before Santiago and assigned to
he 9beyns at the time the battle began 0roers
discbarr Of aGI SUCH mat at 9Sns so engaged In the
@ sPohith f shps emerged from the harbor of Santt-
70 return TO any point whence, personally or by
means OF Communication I with the ships actually
eisdkeu IN the conflict, he might resume his au-
siob yii Ti after me battle at every point OF
40, 10 e, The fact that whereas the commander-in-
the sSs5Io not ana did not exercise command
met NJ Commodore Schley, as second I'm Command
senior line ohcer on the spot during every moment
% and .,nI - -naIue, could and did exercise authority
engaged. -''0e '''uaiS
Further argument on this question OF command
Is 10 the effect that Cook and Clark the two shin
captains present at the surrender OF the Colon
recognized Schley's seniority, and also that sarn
sons order OF battle" failed entirely as soon ~
the Spanish squadron succeeded I'm passing bevond
the westernmost extremity of the American vesseIe
All or which, IL is submitted, goes to prove concIu
slVely that the individual opinion of Dewey was en-
lhentIy proper and wholly justified by the evidence
and the naval regulations.
SAYS THE COURT ERRED.
ENh'oit elaborateS and sustains the statements
hdue In the petition respecting the passage of the
flylng Squadron from Key West TO Cienfuegos
The court declared that Commodore Schley did nor
proceed with the utmost dispatch OFF Cienfuegos
Counsel declare that the court erred In that state
ment; that the sailing orders the squadron did
not direct 1t to proceed with dispatch off Cienfue-
gos but the only direction that point was that
you should establish a blockade off CIenfuegos
with the least possible delay" 1t is declared that
this left Schley discretion that he obeyed these
orders. and that there was delay, the squadron
proceeding at ten knots hour. The petItioner
declares that this passage both expeditious
and effective, and Admiral Schleys conduct unde-
serving of censure, wherefore the majority opinion
should be set aside, and Deweys opinion approved
as otherwise commanders In the future will be de
prlVed or all discretion and the service will be in
jured. The petitioner objects to the majority re-
port that Commodore Schley did not blockade the
port or Cfenfuegos as closely possible" And he
objects to the of the word close as referring
to distance alone. holding that 1t means effective
ness" adequacy" and that all OF the test |
mony showed that the blockade of Cienfuegos was
adequate; that vessel entered or departed with
out his permission. and that all proper and Gus
tomary precautions were taken in the premises He
further declares that the failed to state all
of the pertinent facts regarding the Adula incident