The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, September 21, 1901, Page 1

VOLUME XC—NO. 113. SAN FRANCISCO , SATURPAY, SEPTEMBER. 21, PRICE FIVE CENTS. SCHLEY DID NOT EXERT EVERY EFFOR | DECLARES HIGGINSON, WHO COMMANDED Tt — SENSATION FOLLOWS A UESTION —— Inguiry Court Withdraws It After the Reply s Given. e —— Testimony Conlradicts Chief of| the Flying Squadron Con- cerning Coaling, S S S ASHINGTON, Sept. e it witnesses. vened to-day The most, impor- ant incident of the day was the decision of the court withdrawing a question put b; his opinion concerning a er controversy. The witness was Higginson, who partici- tiago eampaign as cap- attleship Massachusetts. This ne was a part of the flying commanded by Commodore poscible measures were taken or destroy the Spanish vessel frem May 27 to June 1, 1898, Counsel 1 v objected to the ques- that a reply would in- d not a statement of Lemly admitted cre against questions of and the court withdrew It iz generally admit jon will have the effect ning the term of the so the court’s intention to stions and all hear- al cases the wit- to relate only showed himself a 1 presiding officer. order exactly at A prompt He 20.—The | Schley court of inquiry re- and before | adjourned examined four | the court itself asking a | and the court asked him to state | 1 Colon as it Jay in Santiago har- | that | r own observa- | LS 1 { [ | SRar dwival Jc5~€7. explicitly that they were introduced not as testimony but as books of reference. “Will they preclude the introduction of the designa adjourned it just | original documents?” Attorney Wilson as promptly at ¢ o'clock ‘atked The witnesses to-day were Rear Ad-| *“Not at all,”” was the reply. “On the miral Higg who commanded the |contrary, we shall desire to introduce the hip etts during the | original document when opportunity of- Captain C. M. Chester, who | fers.” the cruiser Cincinnati; Major | Captain Parker made objéction to. the Wood of ‘the marine corps, | hydrographic chart- when it was pre- nded the marines on the Mas- Commander G. B. Harber, was smal public Admiral Ramsay Accepted. Rear Admiral Ramsay occupied the seat which on the first ed by Rear al Howison. ee members of the court were in ser- vice uniform, and the morning air was ! Adm cold enough to, make their closely but- toned coats appear comfortable. M Dewey accompanied her husband and re- mained a short t'me. The court was calied to order by a sim- ple word from Admiral Dewey. The first order of business was the reading by ; Judge Advocate Lemly of the order of the Navy Department appointing Rear Ad- miral Ramsay to a place on the court in | place of Rear Adimal Howison, and when this was ished Captain Lemly turned to Rear Admiral Schley and asked him, as he did when Admiral Howison was challenged, whether he had objection to urge against any member of the court. The admiral a asked and replied, “I have not.” The judge advocate then swore the mem- bers of the court collectively, and then in turn was sworn as judge advocate, Methods of Procedure. The court of discussing the methods of procedure, Before the withdrawal a letter from Ad- miral Schley to the Navy Department, req bearing upon the case, and the depart- ment’s reply granting the request was ead. p At 11:25 the court returned from its con- sultation. Judge Advoeate Lemly, ad- dressing Admiral Schley as the “appli- nt,” asked if he had any suggestions to make as to the method of proceeding, whether he had something to offer or de- sired that he (Lemly) proceed. - The ad- miral responded with a nod of the head {nd a move of the hand, “Go ahead.” Lemly then presented the report of the Buréau of Navigation for 188, a hydro- graphic chart of the West Indies and ad- Jacent seas and other charts. He stated ecutive officer of the Texas, | g on the stand when the | The attendance of the se as this question was then retired for the purpose esting to be supplied with all papers | sented. “It is grossly incorrect,” he said. a matter of fact, the coast line of Cuba | is six miles farther south and four miles tarther west than it should be.” He withdrew his objection when assured | that the chart was not to be used as evi- derce. AP C 5 HIGGINSON AS A WITNESS. of the session was | An | | His Views on the Santiago Campaign | Do Not Favor Schley. Admiral Francis J. Higginson, comman- | der in chief of the North Atlantic squad- ship Massachusetts during the Spanish war 2nd that for a part of the time the Messachusetts had been a part of the “Elying Squadron,” of which Admiral | Schley had been in command. He told of ing to Key West, and then, on the 22d of May, of going to Clenfuegos, Cuba. Key West had been left on May 19, 1899, and Clenfuegos reached on the 22d. “What was then done to secure com- | munication with the Cuban forces on shore?’ Lemly asked. “Nothing to my knowledge,” the wit- ness replied. “I did not see that anything was done, but I inderstood that informa- tion concerning the Cub through Captain McCa Admiral Higginson said, in response to questions, that this was later. He also | told, in reply #0 questions, of the pres- ence of the coflier Merrimac and of the departure from Cienfuegos and the ar- rival at’ Santiago on the evening of the 2th. In reply to questions, he said that the Massachusetts had at that time taken on about thirteen tons of coal, but that as the weather was rough this was done with | aifficuity. The witness also told of the fleet leav- ing Santiago for Key West on the night of its arrival at the former place and how, after steaming westward for some time, the vessels, all in response to Com- modore Schley’s signals, returned and steamed to within two or three miles of the mouth of the harbor. ns was received I ron, was the first witness called. He said | he had as captain commanded the battle- | joining the fleet at Newport News; of go- | “What happened to cause the decision | mander in chief,” - I -— to return to Key West?” “I don’t know." Not Impossible to Coal. “What was the condition of the weather at the time for coaling at sea?”’ “It was not impossible to coal, I think.” “Did you have any confepehce with the | commanding officer in regard to returning o Santiago after you had got on the way to Key West?"” “None; we acted under general orders. All we did was to follow the signals of the flagship—the signals of the com- PRINCIPALS IN THE FAMOUS CONTROVERSY CONCERNING THE NAVA‘L BATTLE OF SANTIAGO AND THE CA..#AIGN IN CUBAN WATERS PRECEDING IT, MEMBERS. OF THE COURT OF INQUIRY AND WHO COMMANDED THE BATTLESHIP TEXAS AND NOW GIVES IMPORTANT. TESTIMONY. -+ THE MAN' Speaking of the condition when San- tiago harbior was again reached, the ad- miral said that he could go well into the harbor and.that he saw the Spanish ship Colon lying in' the outer harbor. - He did’| not remember seeing:other vessels, but the Colon was then 1000 yards heyond Morro Castle. The vessel had lain there until she was fired upon, which was done | on May 31, and had then retired. 14 e Describing 1his ‘engagement’ Admiral Higginson said it ‘Was op the day before the arrival of feinforcements under Ad- miral Sampson. He said that Admiral’ Schley had come aboard and ald that | 'was composed of. — e on the “he wanted to.go in and fire Colo Fired on the Colon. e “So we went in and fired on her,” com- tinued the witness. He said the shots fell short of the Colan and that the Spanish shore ‘batterfes had in turn fired at the bombarding ships. " In“reply to questions as to what had been ‘accomplisted by the bombardment, the:witness. replied that it had served to draw the fire of ‘the Spanish shore bat- tery and to give an indication of what it % “What did you think of its composi- tion?” o “I-did not think it amounted to any- thing.” " Where was Admiral Schley during the bombardment 2 “At onetihe he was with me in the conning tower, but most of the time he was on the outside of it. I was near him most of the time.” “Describe the admiral’s manner in this engagement.” “I hardly know how to answer that question, except to say that his manner was that of a commander in chief.” The judge advocate then asked: “What impression did the admiral's mahner in that engagement make upon you?”’ ~ lzy’s Counsel Objects. Atto: <y Raynor, counsel for Schley, objected to this question, and after some contention the question was withdrawn. Judge Advocate Lemly stated before withdrawing the question that he consid- ered the point as embraced in the precept, and said that while the task was a dis- agreeable one le considered it his duty to press it, and intimated that he would do so at another time. “Why did you not go In and destroy the Colon in’ the engagement on May 317" Judge Advocate Lemly asked the witness. “Because we were not ordered to do so,” replied the witn Later on the witness volunteered the statement: “I rhink the Colon could have been destroyed where she lay at anchor that day.” Admiral Higginson stated, in reply to questions from Captain Lemly, that there could recall the only verbal orders were to “go in.” Judge Advocaie Lemly then offered Ad- miral Higginson's report of the 5th of Aygust, saying the report had been made in line of duty. Attorney Wilson of counsel for Admiral Schley said no objection would be made, but that counsel for the applicant did not desire the unobjected acceptance of the report to operate as a precedent. Captain Lemly announced that he had no further questions tq ask of Admiral gginson and counsel fcr Admiral Schley stated they had no questions to put. It was then stated by Captsin Lemly that the court had some questions of its own to present. Sensational Question Asked. These were written. The first was con- cerning the elevation of the guns during the bombardment of Colon on May 21. The reply was that at first they were 7800 feét and latterly 9000 feet. . == were no written orders, and so far as he | The next quep',hn.‘ ROY THE CRUISER COLON; E BATTLESHIP MASSACHUSETTS ¢ A P NAVAL MEN SHED SOME NEW LiGaT ————— Capt, Chester Explains Position of Ships in Loop. —_— Major Woods of the Marines Tells of Hearing Schley Say, Wlgt's Get Out of This." ——— was as to whether there was any placs of shelter near Santiago where the flying squadron could have coaled after its arri~ val at Santiago. Admiral Higginson replied that Guarta- namo was only forty miles to the east. The third question, cogging as it did from the court, created Something of a sensation, which was ided to by the reply. The question wa: as every effort made by Admiral Schiey to destroy or capture the Spanish steamer Colon as she lay at anchor in the harbor at Santiago bétween the 27th and 3ist of May “Object,” ‘‘object,”” “object,” came from each of Admiral Schley’s counsel. Before a halt could be had the witness re- plied: “No, I don't think it was.” Causes a Controversy. The question and reply led to a legal controversy. Wilson and Raynor both gave reasons for their objections. They contended that the question called for the opinion of the witness, whereas only facts were admissible. Raynor asked: “May I ask the court if, according to the method of procedure here, the court has ruled that we are not at liberty to object to any question at all that may be asked?” Admiral Dewey replied: *While this court 1S bound to investigate all the facts, we have the right to ask any question that will bring out the facts. One of the charges against Admiral Schley is whether or mnot every effort incumbent upon the commanding officer of the fleet under such circumstances was made by Commodore Schley to capture or destroy the Spanish cruiser Colon as she lay at anchor in the entrance at Santiago har- bor May 27 to 31, inclusive. We have asked that question a#d we have his (Ad- miral Higginson’s) opinion. This court by the precept is obliged to give an opinion upon the conclusion of the investigation. Now, in the®opinion of the court, and in order to form our opinion, we wanted Ad- miral Higginson's opinion on that sub- ject.” ‘Wilson—"I understand from the precept, reading it through from end to end, to be simply this, that there shall be an in- vestigation to get at the facts. And when you have gotten at the facts then you ex- press your opinion; but you are not called upon, as I must respectfully submit, and are not permitted to take some one else’s opinion. You have a right to get all the facts you can, and that is what we want. but otherwise you will see that you might have a great varlety of opinions and.all the opinions of subordinates. In other wordé, the precept don't call for anybody’s opinion except the opinion of the honora~ ble court.” Dewey Takes a Hand. Admiral Dewey—“In the opinion of one member of the court and perhaps of the others we do not ask his opinion, but for a statement of a matter of fact. We ask, ‘Was everything done? We don't say in your opinion.” Raynor made an extended argument, quoting many legal authorities against the admissibility of the opinion of wit- nesses, and he was speaking when at 1 o’clock the court took a recess for an hour for luncheon. Promptly at 2 o'clock the court was called to order by Admiral Dewey and Raynor resumed his argument in opposi- tion to the admissibility of questions in- tended to call out the opinions of wit- nesses. He contended that if the testi- mony giving opinions should be admitted the inquiry would be interminable. If. for instance, opinions were to be taken as to the propriety of the loop made by the Brooklyn, practically the entire navy could be summoned, as all its members were experts and each would have his opinion. Witnesses were expected to re- late facts; the court to give opinions. Replying, Judge Advocate Lemly quoted the record in the trial §f Admiral Keppel, arguing that it was entirely within the discretion of the court to décide whether the opinion of a witness who had been on the ground should be called for by the court. He thought, however, that the - Continuzd on Page Twos