The Washburn leader. [volume] (Washburn, McLean County, N.D.) 1890-1986, 1902-03-01
SAMPSON WAS tue COMMANDER
ALTHOUGH THE BATTLE WA
FOUGHT WITHOUT ORDERS
FROM EITHER.
LOOP WAS A GRAVE MISTAKE
NO EXCUSE FOR ANY FURTHER
AGITATION OF THIS con-
5TROvERsY.

schley. He says:
"It appears that the court Of inquiry
was unanimous in it's findings of fact
and unanimous in Its expressions OF
opinion on most Of it's findings Of fact.
No appeal is made to me from the YER
dict of the court on these points where
It was unanimous. 7 have, however,
gone carefully over h evidence on
these points also. I am satisfied that
on the whole the court Gid substantial
Justice. It should have specifically
condemned the failure to enforce an
efficient night blockade at Santiago
while Admiral Schley vas in command.
On the other hand I feel that there is
a reasonable doubt whether he did not
move his squadron with sufficient ex-
petition from port to Fort to port. The
court is a unit in condemning Admiral
Echley's action on the point where 1t
seems to me he most gravely erred:
his "retrograde movement" when he
abandoned the blockade, and his dis
obedience 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 hve
weeks or more before the fight itself.
and it certainly seems that If Admiral
Echley's actions were censurable ne
should not have been left as second In
command under Admiral. Sampson.
His offenses were in effect condoned
when he was not called to account Tor
them. Admiral Sampson, after the
fight. in an official letter. to the depart
ment alluded for the first time to Ad-
miral Schley'5 'reprehensible conduct
six weeks previously. If Admiral
Schley was guilty of reprehensible con-
duct of q kind which called for. such
notice from Admiral Sampson, then
Admiral Sampson ought not to have
left him els senior officer of the block
aiding squadron IN the Sd of July when
he (Sompson) steamed away on his
proper errand Of communication with
Gen. Shafter.
eve can, therefore. for u present
purposes dismiss consideration Of 30
much Of the appeal as relates to any
thing :
Except the Battle.
Az regards this. the point raised in the
appeal is between Admiral Sampson
and Admiral Schley, as to which was
in command, and to which was entitled
the credit, is either Of them was really
entitled to any unusual and pre-emi-
nent credit by any special exhibition
Of genius, skill and courage. The ques-
ton Of command is in this case nom-
inal and technical. Admiral SIMPSONS
ship, the New York. was seen at the
outset of the fight from all the ships
except the Brooklyn. -Four Of these
five ship captains have testified. that
they regarded him as present and IN
command. He signalled close In to
the fleet as soon as the first Spanish
ship appeared, but his signal was not
seen by any American vessel. He was
actually under fire from the forts and
himself fired a couple Of shots at the
close of the action with the torpedo
beats in addition to signalling the In
diana just at the close of the action.
But during the action
Not q Single Order
from him was received by any Of the
ships that were actively engaged. Adj
miral Sch1ey at the outset Of the action
ho.sted the two signals clear up and
close in,' which was simply carrying
out the standing orders of Admiral
Sampson as to what should be done
IL the enemy's ships attempted to break
but Of the harbor. Until after the close
o. the first portion of the fight at the
mouth Of the harbor and until after he
had made his loop and the Spanish
ships were fleeing to the westward, not
another American ship noticed q signal
from him. Whel the western pursuit
began the Oregon, and the oregon only.
noticed and repeated one Of his signals
Of command, but did not In any shape
or way execute any n. ovement or any
action OF any kind whatsoever In ac-
cordance with any order from him. IN
short, the question as2to whtchsof the
two men, Admiral Sampson o. Admiral
3chley Yves al the time in command, IL
Of merely nominal character. Tech
Aically
sampson Comnanded
the feet and schley, as usual, the
western division. The actual fact, the
important fact, ID that after the battle
was started not a helm was shifted,
not q gun was fred. not q pound OF
steam was put on in the engine room
aboard any ship actively engaged in
obedience to the order OF either Samp-
son or schley,4 saw on their ownstwo
vessels. It was q captains fight.
"Therefore, the credit to which each
|3f the two IL entitled rests on matters
apart from the claim OF nominal COM
|mand oyer the squadron; for 10 far ~
he actual fight was concerned neither
one nor the other In fact exercised any
cen uaand. Sampson was hardly more
than technically In the fight. TIis real
claim for credit rests upon his work az
commander-n-chief upon the. excel
lcnce OF the blockade; uponst the pre-
|paredness 81 the squadron; upon the