The evening times. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1895-1902, 1902-01-29
ADMIRAL, SCHLEY APPEALS
TO PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT

pages Of the testimony and -rgumeut
heard by the court are sui The
first point made in this cCnns.t--l is that
the court he'd the right and the authority
TO entertain and determine the question
of who was in command of the American
force which destroyed the Spanish feet.
The statement is made that the court
did enquire into matters not specifically
laid Down in the precept. the progress Of
the Flying Squadron from Key West 20
Cienfaegos being cited as an example. and
Admiral Schley then maintains that it
was incumbent upon the court 10 definite
" determine the relationship which did
actually exist between the said Schley
and the American forces engaged in said
battle. and the pTopriety OF such rela-
uonship. since, il the said Schley did eX-
ercise the powers and assume the re
sponSioilities of commandership in the
absence Of any right so to do, his con-
duet would, under the regulations and
articles for the government Of the navy.
have been grossly iusubordinate and cal
culated 10 weaken the lawful authority of
his proper commanding officer. and as
such. would have been highly censurable
and should have been so held by the
court
Official Reports and Log Books.
At the conclusion Of his citations Of
testimony. Admiral Schley. in further
support Of his contention that testimony
was admitted dealing with the question
Of who commanded the American feet
on July 3, states that the official reports
OF the battle OF Santiago made by com
manders OF vessels were admitted in evil
dence and that some Of these were wholly
silent as TO the participancy in the bat
tie Of any officer senior to Schley; that
log books were submitted showing that
the New York on leaving for Siboney on
the morning OF the battle had sent up
signal Disregard movements commander
in-ehief," and other documentary evi-
denee bearing Cd the question.
From all OF which it viii appear,
says the petitioner, that the statement
made by the Honorable the Secretary OF
the Navy TO the contrary notwithstand
ing. testimony was offered and accepted
touching upon and proving each and
every phase Of this question including the
right and duty OF the said Schiey TO ex-
ercise the power and assume the respon-
sibiiities OF such communicating; the
facts as TO his action in the premises
and, these being all shown, that an q gree
ment was made in open court between
counsel for the applicant and the judge
advocate. whereby the said court vas
bound 20 consider the regulations for the
- .
tanning
Question Never Determined.
Under the third point in Appendix A.
namely. thatthe court by its mterrogator-
ies touching the question OF command and
its action IN relation to the matters COW
cred in the testimony. did actually en-
terrain and consider this question. the
following statements are submitted:
That the said question has never been
considered and determined by a body OF
competent jurisdiction having before II
ali the facts and all the parties interested.
THAT a doubt existing as 10 who was
actually in command AZ the battle OF san
tisgo. there arose In the Navy Of the
United states and among the pecaie al
large controversy over this point. which
controversy without being instigated.
iostered. CT countenanced by your petit
tioner. has waged for more than three
years TO The great detriment Of the good
or tine serSce and TO the hart OF those
most concerned in said question.
THAT in the course OF the said con tro-
versy your petitioner was made the OBJ
jet Of the most unjust accusations ar
fectius his personal and public career.
which aceusatiO7s were inspired by these
Who sought 10 establish the fact 1hat
he did not command al the said battle
and that owing 10 the saiG accusations he
hes suffered much injury
Admiral Schley appeals for p decision
in mis- iavo- IN order be says. TO close q
dep.orabie controversy ana because such
a decision VIII perpetuate in history The
true facts surrounding one or THE great
est naval conflicts Of modern limcs and
one Of the greatest naval histories ever
achieved by this country.
His Claim To Command.
Admiral Schley commeuds the opinion
OF Admiral Dewey that ne lSchIeyj was in
command on July 3. and IN support sub
mits statement Of shat he claims 10