Evening star., 1902-01-31

l.
i That these statements are true is shown
by the following extracts from the testi-
| mony:
! Lieut.. Edward Mccauiey, signal officer
OF the Brooklyn (Record, page 1,03S), said:
- was looking around at the squadron
through a long glass, when the Iowa ran
up this signal: Enemy is escaping.
then repeated the signal ''Enemy's s
ships are escaping" and hoisted Clear
/ ship for action on my own hook. I knew
that would be next
Other testimony is cited on this point. and
then the order Close up is considered.
The comment insists that this order was
not seen by any other ship than the Ore
gon, unless, perhaps, the Texas. and that
it exercised no influence whatever upon
any vessel of the squadron. They also
quote Admiral -Schley's testimony that the
Brook1yn's charge was made in accord
ance with the original plan, and they say
the second of the two. signaled from the
Brooklyn during the battle of Santiago, to
| the American fleet, was really formal also.
and was given in accordance with Samp-
sens original plan of battle, which re-
quired closing up with view of sinking
the Spanish vessels in the entrance Sur
prising as this is, 1t is shown by Admiral
Schley's own sworn testimony, and Is cor
roborated by the time and circumstances
under which the signal was made 1t did
| not influence other ships All the captains
had been advised of the plan of battle. and
all closed up accordingly, without wait
lyn, and paid no attention to this signal
which, as above stated. was not seen ex-
cept from. the Oregon, and not from that
ship until after all vessels had closed up.
1t is even more surprising, but it appears
to be a fact, that Admiral Schley issued
no further feet order during the progress
of the battle
Obeyed None of Schley's Orders.
The commentators next state: 'If Com
modore Schley was in absolute command
during the battle, and If he made any use
Of his authority, he must have exercised
some control over some of the vessels par
ticipating," whereupon they take up in de-
tail the testimony of the commanding Of
f1cerS on this point and state this result:
'The plain truth is that Admiral Schley
did not during the battle in any way direct
or control 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 solitary order from him.
"The full record Of the Brooklyn's sig
nails made during the action is as follows:
'9:34 a m.-Iowa to Brooklyn: 'Enemy's
ships escaping
"9:s6 a.. m.-Brooklyn to feet: 'Enemys
ships escaping
1886 a. m.-Brooklyn to fleet: Clear for
action
''9:45 a. m.-Brooklyn to fleet: Close up
''12:30 p. m.-Oregon to Brooklyn: Flag
of strange vessel seen is Italian
1853 p. m.-Sne was Dult IN italy.
while chasing the Colon the Oregon fired
a number of shots at her, and we wigwag-
ged her where each one struck. num-
ber Of other unimportant messages were ex-
changedD
"1:15 p. m.-'Colon fired a lee gun and
hauled down her flag.
Oregon Not Directed by SchIey.
Next the commentators turn their atten-
tion to what they declare were persistent
efforts by Schley's attorneys to show that
in some manner the Oregon, at least was
under his orders during the battle, first by
answering the signal Close up" and af-
terward by firing her thirteen-inch guns
under signal from the Brooklyn, and they
say: But the attempt, as the testimony
quoted shows, was Il failure.
Captain Lemly and MIR. Hanna close their
comments follows:
The contention that the magnificent
work of the Oregon, or any part of it, was
done under orders from the Brooklyn or
that the Oregon received and obeyed even
single order from Commodore Schley from
the time the Spanish ships were sighted to
the time of the surrender of the Colon, which
surrender may fairly be taken as the close
Of the battle, must be abandoned; and with
IL goes the last peg upon which to hang the
pretense of claim that during the battle
of Santiago Commodore Schley effectively
exercised any Of the functions Of COM
mander-in-chief.
Did Not Control Fleet.
1.-THE weight Of the testimony is to the
effect that the commodore controlled the
movements of his flagship, the Brooklyn,
| well. with the exception Of the loop. But it
also shows. not negatively, but Affirmative
ly and beyond question, that he did not
| control the operations Of the fleet in gener-
al on that day.
''All this is established not by theoretical
deduction or expert or inexpert opinion but
by direct. positive, unimpeached and unim-
peachable testimony, given under oath by
the admiraPs brothers in arms
',rhe plain truth of the matter, therefore.
developed for the first time under the
searchlight of this inquiry, although quite
Incidentally, is that so far as the Glouces-
ter, the Iowa, the Indiana, the Texas and
the Oregon are concerned, not the stroke Of
a propeller blade, not the touch Of helm,
not the firing of a shot, was done under
the direction or by the orders Of Admiral
Schiey during this memorable battle"