Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1902-02-28
A CAPTAINS FIGHT.
THAT is THE DISCOVERY MADE
BY TEDDY, AS PRESIDENT,

WV w. '~~~y wv NOoSh NsOSt Jeut NOuSIdt
ulations to the Hero Of Santiago Say,
that Sampson was Technically in Command
Although the Victory was Won by the Cap.
tains. Especially Wainwright lays Greal
Stress on the Perfunctory Recognition ol
Sampson by President Mckinley.
Under date OF the 18th inst, the
President made public the following
statement:
Received the appeal of Admiral
Schley and the answer thereto from
the Navy Department. l have exam.
ined both with the utmost care. as
we'll as the preceding appeal to the
Secretary of the Navy. 1 have read
through all the testimony taken be-
fore the court and the statements of
the counsel for Admiral Sampson and
Admiral Schley; have examined all
the official reports of every kind in
reference to the Santiago naval cam
paign, copies of log books, and the tes-
timony before the court of claims,
and have also personally had before
me the four surviving captains from
the five ships, aside from those of the
two Admirals, which were actively en-.
gagged at Santiago.
1t appears that the Court OF In
quiry 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.
l have, however, gone carefully over
the evidence on these points also. l
am satisfied that on the whole it did
substantial justice.
1t should have specifically con.
demned the failure to enforce an ef.
ficient night blockade at Santiago
while Admiral Schley was in COM
mand, but on the other hand, feel
that there is . reasonable doubt
whether he did not move his squadron
with sufficient expedition from port TO
port. The court is united in con.
demning Admiral schley's action on
the roint where it seems to me he
most grsvely erred; his retrograde
movement" when ho abandoned the
blockade and his disobedience of Or
ders and misstatement of facts in re-
lation thereto. It should be remem-
bered, however, that the majority OF
these actions which the court GEN.
sures occurred five weeks or more be-
fore tho fight itself and certainly
seems that if Admiral Schley's actions
were censurable he should not have
been left az second in command under
Admiral Sampson. His 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, alluded for
the first time to Admiral Schley's
reprehensible conduct, six weeks pre-
viously. If Admiral Schlcy was
guilty Of reprehensible conduct OF .
kind which called for such notice
from Admiral Sampson, then Admi.
raj Sampson ought not to have left
him a. senior officer of the blockading
squadron on the Sd of July, when he
(Sampson) steamed away on his proper
errand of communication with Gene
raj Shafter.
1--WE can, therefore, for present pur-
poses, dismiss consideration of 90
much Of the appeal ~ relates to any.
thing except the battle. Az regards
this, the point raised in the appeal is
between Admirals Sampson and Schley
as TO which was in command and ~
to which WAS entitled to the credit, il
either OF them was really entitled to
any unusual and pre-eminent credit by
any special exhibit OF skill and cour-
age.
"The court could have considered
both of these questions, but as mat.
ter Of fact, it unanimously excluded
evidence offered upon them and
through ito pre-announced refusal to
hear Admiral Sampson's side at all,
and in view of such exclusion. the ma
jority OF the court acted with entire
propriety in not expressing any opin-
ion upon this point. The matter has,
however, been raised by the President
OF the court. Moreover it is the point
upon which Admiral Schley in his ap-
peal lays most stress, and which ne
especially asks me to consider. /
have, therefore, carefully investigated
this matter also and have informed
myself upon it from the best sources
of information at my command.
"The appeal Of Admiral Schley to
me is not. - to this chief point he
raises. really an appeal from the de-
cision of the Court of Inquiry. Five
sixths of the appeal is devoted to this
question OF command and credit; that
is, to matters which the Court OF In
quiry did not consider.
"It is, in effect, an appeal from the
action of President Mckinley, three
years ago, when he sent in the recon-
mendations for promotion for the W.
rious officers connected with the San
tiago squadron. basipg these recon-
mendations upon his estimate Of the
credit to which the officers were re.