Cameron County press. [volume] (Emporium, Cameron County, Pa.) 1866-1922, 1902-02-06
APPEAL OF SCHLEY
Lemly and Hanna Comment Upon
1t as Submitted to the President.
Reviewers Of the Appeal Say the GLORY
Of Victory Belongs TO SanIpson--
Commentators Claim Court of
Inquiry Would Not Hear
SampsOn's story.

NdSnlnB Jan ol'--IhC COlh
ment" of Judge Advocate General
Lemly and Solicitor Hanna upon the
appeal of Admiral Schley, as submit
tea to the president by Secretary
Long, is less than a third as long as
the appeal. The commentators begin
with the statement that Admiral
Schley and his counsel have shifted
their ground. They say the chief
features of the case were 'the retro
grade movement" 'disobedience OF
ORDERS" inaccurate and misleading
official reports" failure to destroy
vessels of the enemy, lying within
sight" ana 'inJustice to brother Of
ticer."
The first wls that the finest aggre-
cation of AU"rican navaI vessels un-
der one command was, by Schleys
direction, turned about and headed
for Key West, more than 700 miles
distant, when within - miles of San
tiago, where the enemy's ships were.
The second was that Schley delibcr-
ately disobeyed the secretary's order
overtaking him in his retrograde
movement.
The third was that Schley's reason,
officially given for the retrograde
movement and Hsobedience of or
ders, i. e., that the flying squadron
was short of coal" was not true.
The fourth was that for three days
some of the Spanish feet lay within
reach of the flying squadron, and no
sufficient effort was made to destroy
them.
The fifth involves the point of hon
or. The commentators say: Upon
all the above named features, be-
lieved by us to be the most important
matters into which the court made
inquiry, the conduct of Admiral
Schley was condemned by that most
distinguished tribunal. Admiral
Dewey and Rear Admirals Benham
and Ramsay united in their opinion
upon all of these several points"
The commentators charge that
Schley now ignores all these grave
matters and bases mis- appeal upon
unimportant features of the case as
compared with the grave matters
referred to, upon which there was
not, and, in the face of the testi-
Inony, could noU have any difference
of opinion in the court"
The commentators say they recog.
nize the fact that Admiral Schley
devoted by far the larger part of his
appeal to the question of command,
and consequently give that question
a proportionate space in their com
mcnt. They declare that the ques.
tion is between Sampson and Schley
both alike interested, and to investi.
gate it fairly both should be heard
Such testimony on this point as came
before the court was on Schley's side
only, and the doors were closed to
Sampson.
AS showing Schley's own opinion
of who was in command, they quote
this passage from his dispatch OF
July 10, 1898, to the secretary of the
navy: Feel some modification that
the newspaper accounts of July
have attributed victory of July 3 al
most entirely to me. Victory was Sc.
cured by the force under the com
mander-in-chief of the North Atlantic
squadron, and to him the honor is
due"
Further, they quote Schley's letter
of December Is, 1901, to Secretary
Long, justifying the loop" on the
expressed ground that it was made
sin the execution of the standing
order to close in" II is asked but
if he was then himself i'm command.
how happens it that he was eXecut-
ing the orders of somebody else in
command? Before the court of in.
quiry, every prop raised to support
the contention that Schley did any
thing to achieve the victory by is
suing orders as commanding officer
of the American feet was removed.
The plain truth was for the first
time revealed that Schley did not eX-
ercise command on that day over any
ship, except to some extent, his own
flagship, the Brooklyn"
The commentators declare: The
question is not so much one of possi-
of Admiral Schley, in connection with
the work of that vessel in the bat
tie of Santiago. The plain truth is
that Admiral Schley did not during
the battle in any way direct or con
troll the splendid performances of
the Gloucester and the three battle
ships, Indiana, Iowa and Texas. The
officers in command of these ships
neither received nor obeyed a soli-
tary order from him"