Show Against Admiral Schley ASHINGTON WASHINGTON Feb Fob t Roosevelt Roose has announced his his decision on t Schley appeal as' as follows L White bite House Feb eb 19 t 1 have reed rec re- re c ed the appeal 0 of ot Admiral Schley and t answer thereto from from- the Navy dep de- de p I h have e examined both with tho the utmost care carer ak aa well as the preceding ce a bite pI peu to the be 1 Secretary e tp of the Navy I I naye read through all the testimony testimony- tak ta ta- k before the court and the statements statements' t the counsel for Admiral lS l'S Sampson m son son- and A miral Schley have examined all the I official reports of ot every verv kind in reference t 1 the Santiago g n naval tJ campaign p copies I books and the testimony g before F th the thc c court urt of claims and have also per- per ally iU ally had before me the four surviving c of ot the five ships ship a aside from I thO so c of ol the two Admirals which were I a actively engaged ged at Santiago I tit lit appears that the court court of of Inquiry was unanimous In Its findings of fact and I s in its ith expressions of opinion of I un most of its findings of fact No apil apis ap ap- p il l I JK is mad to me nie from froze the verdict of ot the tho court on these points where It w was wM unanimous I I gone e carefully care ute ep fully I over the ce on on those these p points points' also I am ant that on th the whole th lh the court did substantial justice justic It It should have specifically condemned th the the- to enforce an efficient night bl ek ad ade at Santiago o while Admiral was In command On the other band r feel feet that there thele I is a reasonable doubt whether the he did not move his with pith sufficient eX expedition from port to port bort tott i Tho iThe court e is 13 united in condemning Admiral Ad- Ad miral Schley's action on the point re Its to me inc he most gravely erred his retrograde rade aban ban ban- movement when he heban the blockade and his disobedience of and misstatement of facts fo Jn In mation thereto It should be remembered tt lions v hIJ that the b majority j of t the these lc- lc which the court o censures u s occurred r live five we weeks s or more morp before the fight itself I end ana it certainly seems that If Admiral K Sebley's SChley's actions were censurable he should not hr have ve been left as al second in command under Admiral Sampson S its orren offenses cs were in effect When ne he was not called to account for th them in Admiral Sampson after aftel the light fight i o official la letter ct to the department P IUd tot ii for the h t time to Admiral i SChley's reprehensible con conduct six w week ki Previously It If Admiral Schley Was KU guilty ty oj o reprehensible conduct of a aT aA A kind which I T called g. g for such notice e from lr Sampson amPs r n. n then Admiral i S Samp- Samp lion eon nn ought 2 not nor to have nave left him as senior om of ith the blockading squadron on the tho 3rd aWa of oe J July ul wh when n ho he Sampson steamed cation away on his proper errand of communication with Gen n- n Shatter Ve vv C can ln i poses r HOB Crt for our present purposes pur- pur IB consideration of so 80 much of th the appeal appal the tho as relates to anything except except ex- ex cent battle Ji As r regards this the in the point appeal Is ls between n i Admirals lUll as to which was wasi In Command a tad ind dlf i as to which was entitled credit it ir if either t r 6 of lf them r was really entitled to any unusual and pre skill mitan b. b i an LL I a Special exhibit of ot J genius Kenius 1 8 e ITt cout could coul have Q b both boU h of these but as n. n matter of fa a t I It nl excluded Deluded 1 evidence off offered red d upon J n them and ard through its ith pre t I 4 46 4 l 01 1 President A 4 to 4 in the S 'S hley appeal are in ini Aj A 4 effect 64 z 6 j. j 4 Question of pf of command nominal 4 1 and 2nd technical j l. l None Non of the Amer- Amer ll r- r 6 01 I ith ships Sh i ships s skye save ve the Oregon no- no noA A 4 4 signals ls from either ither the New 1 el York Jork or Broo- Broo Brooklyn Brooklyn- 4 4 Technically y Sampson com com- comA A 4 I th the fleet and Schley as A 4 01 4 usual the tho western division A t tActual 6 Actual fact is that It w was was wasa as a a 4 4 Captains Captains' fight After the battle I 4 1 11 T 1 ben e en n h hut huta t a ingle lIngle thing was done oI A 4 o- o 4 t or rd any Ii S ship lp actively engaged I I oie eL II bt tp tc t order of either eitler 4 A tor br Schley iley save on th their lr A Aown I 1 o own oa n Vessels 1 r J I 4 I S So far as actual fight tight is Is con con- conA A 1 l oJ erred neither on one p pr the other other A 4 exercised an any e c command d. d Aj A sampson m on technically t hardly MarShy in A 4 j 4 1 fiK tig t t. t Real cJ m tor Jor or credit rests A 4 i I on his worlo as commander ln A 4 T. T C i ex excellence of blockade A 4 upon preparedness s of or squadron 41 z 4 head ahead 4 ships ships ahead or v 6 in a semi around harbor At A Ie t I 4 and standing orders orders In accordance A Av 4 v with which they rho moved thota t to attack A 4 Spanish Sp ships Credit for these A Av 4 v 4 things is due him A 4 01 1 Schley is rightly en entitled tI as is A 4 1 Capt pt Clark to th credit for what A S oWyn did in the fight She did A 4 1 w well il The loop was a mistake It A 4 1 marred mar otherwise excellent record A 4 I of f the ship and was the one grand A 4 10 1 mistake made by American ships A Ie 4 01 In the battle J. J 4 2 After loop was made Schley 4 4 A hap handled led I I Brooklyn manfully and 10 1 well In 4 t the chase 0 ot the COlon 4 i oi I the u BroOklyn lyn and Oregon share shafe A to 4 toof Credit lt K of 4 6 r between them m. m A A 1 President McKinle's s 's 4 4 w were o eminently proper It A 1 I would have be beeh h unjust for him to toI I 1 A 4 have made 4 A 4 01 A z 4 Believes it 4 would have been well A AA 4 oo A 1 to havo given Cl Clark Clrk rk s same me advance advance- 4 01 A 1 inept that given gIen was A rJ 4 I Finds In that as a regards Sampson A AA z 4 zand A l and Schley President President McKinley 4 A 4 did did substantial justl justice e. e and there A AA 4 A 4 would be bo no warrant for or reversing rJ A 4 liIs h action A 4 4 1 Indorses recommendations of A to 6 court of inquiry that no further 4 o action be had in matter There is 4 4 4 01 no excuse from either cither side for fOT any r 4 J further agitation of unhappy coni con- con conj 4 j i 2 t ov 4 4 A i. i A A i- i 44 ih i- i AA AA 4 h I announced refusal to hear A Admiral Sampsons Sampson's Sampsons Sampsons Sampson's Samp Samp- sons son's side at all and in VIew of such exclusion ex ex- elusion the majority or of the court acted with entire ril propriety lt olm in not expressing any o opinion cf on or this point The appeal of Admiral Schley to me mc is not as to this the chief point he raises really an appeal from the decision of the court of inquiry sixths Five-sixths of the appeal appeal appeal ap ap- ap- ap peal is devoted to to thi th this question of command command com com- mam mand an ant and credit that Is to matter which the court of Inquiry did not con consid er l It Is in effect an appeal f from the a ac rf tion n of President es t McKinley 1 FI three g years ago when he sent in the recommendations for promotion for the various officers connected With th the thC S gO sq basing estimate these of the recommendations credit lo to a which Y h upon the o officers officers his l lct ct cers rs were respectively entitled What I have to decide therefore Is whether or not President McKinley did Injustice in the matter This necess necessarily involves a comparison of the actions of ot ott exhaustive the t different f n official ff commanders F reports egl engaged or of the action The leave little to be brought out anew but butas butas butas as the toe question of Admiral Sampsons Sampson's right to be considered d in l i chief command which h was determined d in his favor by President McKinley and later by the tho court of claims has never hitherto been officially raised I deemed It best to seCure secure secure se se- se- se cure statements from the commanders of oe the five ships other than the Brooklyn and New York the flagships of the two Admirals which were actively engaged In the fight Admiral Philip Is dead I quote extracts from hl his magazine article on the fight ht written immediately after It occurred closing with an extract t from his letter fi to the Secretary a of the Navy of February 27 1899 The question of command of-command is in this case nominal and technical Admiral Sampsons Sampson's Sampsons Sampsons Sampson's Samp Samp- sons son's ship the thc New ew York was seen at atthe atthe atthe the outset of tl tue fight from all the ships except the Brooklyn Four of or these five ship Captains have c testified that they regarded regarded re re- re- re He signaled him das as present close iose In and d t to in command the fleet t as soon i a as the first Spanish ship appeared appeared appeared ap ap- ap- ap but bit this signal was not seen by any American vessel yssel He was was actually a actually under e fire front tW nl the tortS forts himself i iW W fired a couple of shots at the tho close of the action action- at atthe the torpedo boats in III addition to signaling th the Indiana Indiana- just at the close of th the action But during the a action not a n. single order from irom rom him him was received b by I any of the ships that were actively en In- In short the tho question as to which one of th two the two men Admiral Sampson or Admiral Admiral Admiral Ad Ad- miral Schley was wasat a at tho the time in Command command com Corn mand is of m merely rely nominal character Technically Sampson commanded the Heat t and Schley as usual the western division i The e actual fact act the important ha itt J fact Is tl that after the battle Was j Joined J not a helm was shifted d not a gun was fired not a pound of steam was put on onn n the C room engine aboard any aay ship l ac actively ac- ac Wv d lively e engaged In obedience t order pf of either Sampson tar or Schley save on their own two vessels Jt It t was a Captains fight fig Therefore the credit to which each of the twO wO is entitled re rests ts on matters apart from the cl claim hn of nominal command over the squadron for so far as the actual tight light was concerned concerned- d- d neither one or the theother theother other In fact exercised an any command Sampson was as hardly more more nore than than tech tech tech- in the fight tight Ins His real reaL claim for credit rests upon his work as command command- i in er-in-chief upon the excellence of the blockade upon th the preparedness oT ol the squadron upon the arrangement pf Ute the ships on head-on in a semi circle around around- the e harbor and and- the standing orders in accordance accordance ac ac- ac- ac with which they Ins instantly antl moved to the attack of the Spaniards I when the latter appeared For all these things the the be credit is his Admiral Sc Schley ley Is rightly entitled entitled entitled-as as asis is Capt Cook to Cook to the credit of what the Brooklyn Brooklyn- did ih the fight On the whole she did well but I 1 agree unanimous finding of the three Admirals who composed composed com corn posed the court of Inquiry as to the loop It seriously marred the Brooklyn's otherwise otherwise otherwise other other- wise excellent record being in fact the theone theone one grave mistake made by any American American Ameri Amen can shi ship th that t day Had the t e Brooklyn turned to the westward westward- that is iri ln the same the Spanish ships were going Instead of the the- contrary direction she would undoubtedly have been in more mOTe dangerous proximity to them But it w would Uld have llave been more dangerous for them as as' well as for her But after the loop had b been taken Ad- Ad m minal Schley I handled a fl dh the thc c cb Brooklyn i o manfully man man- man man-c fully ully and well She and the Oregon were thenceforth the rearmost of oe the American Amen Ameri can cn vessels vessels though though the Iowa certainly and seemingly the Texas did as much in hammering to a a. standstill the Viscaya Oquendo and the Teresa While the Indiana Ih- Ih diana did all her eastward position position- and crippled machinery permitted In the chase of the thc Colon the Brooklyn and Ore Oregon share tho Uie credit credit- betwee 1 hem them Und r. r such tich circumstances circumstances' n It 5 seems ms to tome tome tome me th that th the te ll n n of esi dent deaf I l were vre eminently ml proper r and that hM so far ar as Admirals Sampson and Schley w were rr re it WoW H Kaye ye been unjust for te ba made other recommendations fer I feel that in view o of Capt Cap r lon long V voyage ge in the h and th ir In 11 which he brought her to th the the- rif f s service i as aswell aswell well well- as M thc the way jn n which he hc actually y l her r lJ t re f d th the the- o fight t it would have ave J een ll to to h the th Kime ume adv cement that that that- via's vias g given n W- W W i W waiving ng is evident that wa wb's to to W than 11 th j 1 anti and d that 1 it was just u i to Admiral Admiral Ad Ad- miral Sampson that he should receive a greater advancement In Jn numb numbers rs' rs than Admiral 1 Schley tl Schley was vas nothing done In Jn the tho battle that warra Warranted ed any udus unus unusual ual reward for either cither In jp short a as rc re- gards gands Admirals Sampson and Schley I Ilind lind that President l did substantial i substantial sub sub- b. b justl justice and there would be no warrant for for- or- or reversing the Both Admirals Sampson and Schley are arenow arenow now on the r Ur list In Itt concluding their report the members of the court of inquiry Dewey Benham and amy Ramsay In g that they recommend re rc re recommend commend that that no further action be bo had hadIn hadin hadin in the matt matter r. r Iti Ith this recommendation rE-commenda- rE tion 1 ms he heartily concur T There ere Is i's no excuse whatever from Cram rem either either- side for any furth further r agitation o of ot this In r. r To 0 keep It t would damage to the and to the countrY THEODORE nOO EVELT |