The San Juan islander. [volume] (Friday Harbor, Wash.) 1898-1914, 1902-02-27


Roosevelt has made public his decision
in the schley appeal, and in it he en-
dorses the findings of the court. The
president says he has carefully read all
the testimony before the court and the
appeal to the secretary of the navy pre-
viously made, and he is confident the
court did substantial justice.
The Retrosrsds Movement.
In regard to the retrograde movement
President Roosevelt says:
should have specifically condemned
the failure to enforce an efficient night
blockade at Santiago while Admiral
Schley was in command. On the other
hand, feel that there is a reasonable
doubt whether he did not move his
squadron with sufficient expedition from
port to port. The court is united In
condemning Admiral Schley's action on
the point where it seems to me he most
gravely erred: his "retrograde move
ment," when he abandoned the block
ade and his disobedience of orders and
misstatement of facts in relation thereto.
1t should be remembered, however, that
the majority of these actions which the
court censures occurred five weeks or
more before the fight itself. and it GER
tainly seems that if Admiral Schley's
actions were censurable he should not
have been left as second in command,
under Admiral Sampson. His offenses
were condoned in effect 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 "reprs-
hensible conduct" six weeks previously.
Ii Admiral Schley was guilty of repre-
hensible conduct of kind which called
Tor such notice from Admiral Sampson,
then Admiral Sampson ought not to
have left him as senior officer OF the
blockading squadron on July 8, when
he (Sampson) steamed away on his
proper errand of communication with
Gen. Shafter. We can, therefore, for
present purposes, dismiss consideration
of so much of the appeal as relates to
anything except the battle.
One ston Of Command.
AS regards this, the point raised in the
appeal is between Admirals Sampson
and Schley, as to which was in command,
and as to which was entitled the credit,
if either of them was really entitled to
any unusual and pre-eminet credit by
any special exhibit of fitness, skill or
courage. The court could have consid-
cred both of these questions, but as
matter of fact it unanimously excluded
evidence offered upon them, and through
its pre-announced refusal to hear Ad-
miral SIMPSONS side at all, and in view
of such exclusion, the majority of the
court acted with entire propriety in not
expressing any opinion on 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 appeal, lays most stress,
which he especially asks me to consider.
l have therefore carefully investigated
self upon it from the best sources at my
command.
The appeal OF Admiral Schley to me is
not, as to this, the chief point he raises,
really an appeal from the decision of the
court of inquiry. Five-sixths of the ap-
peal is devoted to this question of COM
mand and credit; that is, to matter
which the court of inquiry did not con-
slider. 1t 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 various
officers connected with the Santiago
squadron, basing these recommendation
upon his estimate of the credit to which
the officers were respectively entitled.
What | have to decide, therefore, is
whether or not President Mckinley did
Injustice in the matter. This necessarily
involves a comparison of the actions of
the different commanders engaged. 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
officially raised, deemed it best to Sc
cure statements from the commanders
of the five chips (othsr than the Brook
lyn and New York, the fagships of the
two admirably which were actively en-
gagged in the fight.
The president quotes at considerable
length from statements by Admiral
Philip. Captain Clark, Admiral Taylor,
Commander Wainwright and others,
and then outlines the position and work
of each ship.
Coming to the question of command,
the president says that WAS merely nom.
inal, and that therefore the credit to
which each was entitled rested on mat
tiers apart from this; for 80 far as the.
actual fight was concerned, neither one
or the other exercised any command.
Sampson was hardly more than technic-