Willmar tribune. [volume] (Willmar, Minn.) 1895-1931, 1902-02-26

the answer thereto from the navy depart
ment. have examined both with the ut
most care, as well as the preceding appeal
to the secretary Of the navy. have read
court and the statements of the counsel
Tor Admirals Sampson and Schley; have
examined all the official reports Of every
Kind in reference to the Santiago naval
campaign. copies of the log-books and sig
nal books, and the testimony before the
court of claims, and have also personally
had before me the four surviving captains
of the five ships, aside from those Of the
two admfrals. which were actively engaged
at Santiago.
Court Did Substantial Justice.
ut appears that the court Of inquiry
was unanimous in its findings of fact and
unanimous In its expressions OF opinion on
most of its findings of fact. No appeal is
made to me from the verdict OF the court
on these points where it was unanimous.
have, however, gone carefully over the
evidence on these points also. am salts
fled that on the whole the court did sub
stantial justice.
1T should have specifically condemned
the failure to enforce an efficient blockade
at Santiago while Admiral Schley was in
command. On the other hand, feel that
did not move his squadron with sufficient
expedition from port to port.
Grave Errors.
1.-THE court is a unit In condemning Ad-
miral Schley's action on the point where
1t seems to me he most graVely erred, his
''retrograde movement when he aban-
doned the blockade, and his disobedience
of orders. and misstatement of facts In
relation thereto. It should be remembered,
however, that the majority Of these actions
which the court censures occurred five
olc hofnro tho fiphf itself. and
it certainly seems that If Admiral Schley's
actions were censurable. he should not
have been left as second in command I'M
der Admiral Sampson.
A Slap at Sampson.
Ellis 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 department, al
luded for the first time to Admiral .Schley's
'reprehensible conduct six weeks previous
ly. If Admiral Schley was guilty of re-
prehensible conduct of a kind which called
for such notice from Admiral Sampson,
then Admiral Sampson ought not to have
steamed away on his proper errand of
communication with Gen. Shafter.
Question of Command.
1--WE can, therefore, for our present pur-
poses dismiss consideration of so much
of the appeal as relates to anything except
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, IL either of them was really
entitled to any unusual and preeminent
credit by any special exhibition of genius.
skill and courage. The court could have
considered both Of these questions, but as
a matter of fact it unanimously excluded
evidence offered upon them. and through
its president announced it's refusal to hear
Admiral SIMPSONS side at all, and in view
of such exclusion the majority of the court
acted with entire propriety in not express
ing any opinion on these points The mat
ter has. however, been raised by the presi-
dent of the court. Moreover, 1t is the
point upon which Admiral Schley in his
appeal lays most stress, and which he
therefore. carefully investigated this mat
ter also and have informed myself upon
it from the best sources Of informa ton
at my command. g.. = e.,
Was McKinley Unjustg
1.-THE appeal of3Admiral Schley to me is
not, as to this. the chief point he raises.
really an appeal from the decision of the
is devoted to this question of command
and credit; that Is. to matters which the
court Of inquiry did not consider. It Is In
effect an appeal from the action of lPresi-
dent Mckinley. three years ago, when he
sent in the recommendations for promo
ton for the various officers connected with
the Santiago squadron, basing these rec
ommenda atoms upon his estimate of the
credit to which the officers were respect
lively entitled. What have to decide,
therefore, is whether or not President Nc
Kinley did injustice in the matter. This
necessarily involves a comparison of the
actions of the different commanders en-
gagged.
1.-THE exhaustive official reports Of the
action leave little to be brought out anew,
but as the question of Admiral SIMPSONS
right to be considered in chief command,
which was determined in his favor by
President Mckinley and later by the court
of claims, has never hitherto been official
~ raised, I deemed it best to secure state
ments of the commanders Of the five ships
(other than the Brooklyn and New York,
the fagships of the two admirals) which
were actively engaged in the fight"
The president then quotes from maya
zine article written by Admiral Philip, who
has since died, and from letter written
by HIM to the secretary of the navy, Feb
ruary n, 1899, In which he gives as his view
that Admiral Sampson was in command
before, during and after the battle.
Capt. C1ark's Views.
In a statement secured from Capt. Clark
and quoted by the president, the former
says 1.-The credit for the blockade which
led up to the fight is, OF course, Admiral
Simpsons" Also: II considered Commo-
dore Schley in responsible command dur
ing the running fight and chase SO far as
was concerned, and acknowledged and
repeated a signal he had flying for close
action or something of the kind. AS how
ever, the problem was perfectly simple,
namely, to pursue the Spanish ships, as
I had been doing before saw the Brook
lyn, he did not as matter of fact exercise
any control over any movement or action
of the Oregon, nor did perform any action
of any kind whatever in obedience to any
order from the Brooklyn, neither as to my
course nor as to my speed, nor as to my
gun fire. during the fight or chase"
Admiral Evans Statement.
The following is Admiral Evans state
ment: 1.-The credit for the blockade for
the arrangement of the ships at the OPEN
ing of the fight, and for the first move
ments forward into the fight must of course
belong to Admiral Sampson. whose orders
we were putting into effect. When the
fight began Admiral SIMPSONS ship. the
New York. was in plain sight. saw her
turning to overtake us. Throughout the
fight. considered myself as under his
command, but I received no orders from
him until the Viscaya was aground. Nor
did l receive any orders whatever from
the Brooklyn, nor should I have needed
them If had received them, inasmuch as
I considered Admiral Sampson to be pres
ent and in command"
1.-THE New York had left the blockading
line flying the signal disregard the move
New Amateur Champion.