Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1902-01-29
scHLEY'S APPEAL
TO The PRESIDENT
IF Text Of Petition Question Of Com
n,od at Santiago Chief Point Longs
comment" Not Yet Ready.

the Adula was permitted TO gain in
formation; and finally, that the passage
from Cienfuegos 20 a point off Santiago
| was made with as much despatch as
possible while Keeping the squadron a
unit The petition declares that this
opinion, being at variance IN certain
points with the majority opinion, ~
the only one justified by the evidence
ana facts before the court, and it is
asked that the secretarys approval Of
the majority findings be- set aside and
annulled In each instance whore ii is
at variance with Admiral DeWey's
opinion, and that the latter's opinion
should be approved for the reasons
heretofore set out in the bill Of ex-
oeptiOns filed with the secretary Of the
navy. II is also asked that the PrCsl-
| dent annual that portion of Secy, Longs
! Endorsement which states "As 10 points
on which the presiding member differs
| from the opinion of the majority Of the
court, the opinion OF the majority IL
| approved, and that In place ne sub
stitute ana approve the declaration of
| Admiral Dewey on these points above
referred to- connected with the pds-
sage from Key West to Cienfuegos and
thence TO Santiago, The petition con-
cludes;
CONCLUSION OF PETITION.
"And your petitioner most respect
! fully states that only by the action for
| which he prays In this relation can
exact justice be done him within the
! contemplation of the precept under
! which the said court sat and whence
! It derived It's authority
"All Of which Is most respectfully
submitted
J EXHIBIT a."
Exhibit "A" Is an argument and a
| resume OF testimony concerning the
| question Of command during the battle
OF Santiago and comprises fully two
thirds OF the GO printed pages which
make up the petition and exhibits. IL
discusses the right Of the court to con-
slider the question OF command; the
fact ae TO whether or not 1t actually !
did so, the proprlety OF Dewey's opin"
ion in regard to that question and the |
action requisite to exact justice on this
point. II Is stated that the precept |
and Instructions directed the court to |
Thoroughly inquire into all OF the In
vestigation,' ana IL is argued that UNI
der the general az well az under this |
specific authority, the court had full
power TO investigate, and was not re-
quired to limit the inquiry TO Schleys |
conduct In connection with specific d.
rectlons contained IN the precept. II
Is declared that 1t did actually investi- |
gate under this general authority, GER
! tain details of his conduct outside OF
| the specific directions and II is pointed
| out that the movement Of the flying !
squadron from Key West TO Cienfuegos
| was one OF the subjects Of inquiry not
| specified In the precept, Therefore,
counsel holds that II is an incontestlble |
| fact that the court was authorized 10
| determine the question Of command at |
| the battle of Santiago,
WHAT RECORD SHOWS.
II Is also declared that the record of |
| the court shows that Schley did ac-
| tually exercise the powers and assume |
| the responsibilities Of command over |
| the American forces In the battle and |
| If he did this, In the absence Of any |
| right so TO do, then, under the naval |
| regulations, his conduct would have |
| been grossly nsubordinate and calcu- |
| lated to weaken the lawful authority |
| Of his proper commanding officer and |
as such would have been highly cen |
| surable and should have been so held |
| by the court" IL is further stated |
| that The court itself did not deny its |
| right to INQUIRE into this subject OF |
! command, and that the secretary OF the !
navy never did his disapproval Of |
Deweys declaration being based sole
| " upon an erroneous statement that |
| the court had excluded evidence In re-
| lation thereto"
WHAT COURT CONSIDERED.
The counsel then take up the question
| Of fact as to whether the court did |
| actually entertain and consider the |
| question of command, and 10 deter
mine this point they submit a great
| number OF excerpts from the official re-
| cord OF the court These are based on
testimony given by many officers, In
| Guiding Commodore Howison. who In |
| the course Of an interview on board
| ship, spoke Of Sampson as being IN
| command; Commander Heilner, Com
mander sharpe, Lieutenant Doyle, Cap'
| tain Dawson, Lieutenant COMMANDER
Hodgson, Lieutenant Bristol. Admiral
| Taylor. Captain Cook Llept. Command
| eli 0tNlSt laltult MANHAlNNf 'A'NAF " 49,
| ster, Ensign Marble, Lieut.. Commander
| Griffin. Lieut. Commander Nicholson
| Lieut.. Simpson Lieut.. Alderman
| Lieut.. Eberle, Lieut. Johnston, Captain
| Clark. and Admiral Schley himself In |
| addition counsel includes the testimony |
| OF some OF the newspaper witnesses
| and quotes portions Of his own argu-
lnent TO the court where he was allow
| ed TO discuss the subject of command
| An OF these. II is respectfully submit
| ted, amounted to a formal 'ntertaln-
| ment and consideration by The said
| court Of this question and obligated II
to find the fact and report Its opinion
| thereupon."
OBLIGATION on COURT
AS to the general obligation on the
| court TO determine this question OF
| command, the counesl declare that they
| should have done so because
(a) The question has never been CON
| sldered and determined BY q body OF |
| competent jurisdiction having before 1t
an the facts and all the parties inter"
cstcd.
,b) That a doubt existing as to who
was actually in command al the battle
| Of Santiago. there arose IN the navy OF
the United States and among the peV-
! pie at large a controversy over ulls
| point, which controversy, without being
instlgated, fosterei or conntenanced by
your petitioner, has waged for more
than hree years TO the great detrimeni
Of the good OF the service ana 70 the
hart Of those most concerned IN the
said question.
(c) That in The course OF the saiu
controversy your petitioner was MADE
the object of most unjust accusations
Affecting his personal and public char,
acter which accusations were inspired
by those who sought TO establish NE
fact that he did not command at the
said battle, and that owing to sa ,i &C.
cusations he has suffered much injury,
Cdl That The said controversy brouSht
about a condition which resulted N an
those persons present ana participating
in said battle being denied the rewards
which generous country Is disp0ssu '