A Legal View of the Schley Inquiry.
147
THE DISSENTING OPINION. amined both with the utmost care, as well as the preced In the opinion of the undersigned, the passage from ing appeal to the Secretary of the Navy. I have read Key West to Cienfuegos was made by the Plying Squad through all the testimony taken before the Court and the ron with all possible dispatch, Commodore Schley having statements of the counsel for Admirals Sampson and in view the importance of arriving off Cienfuegos with as Schley; have examined all the official reports of every kind in reference to the Santiago naval campaign, copies much coal as possible in the ships' bunkers. of the logbooks and signal books, and the testimony beThe blockade of Cienfuegos was effective. Commodore Schley, in permitting the steamer "Adula "! fore the Court of Claims, and have also personally had to enter the port of Cienfuegos, expected to obtain infor before me the four surviving captains of the five ships, mation concerning the Spanish squadron from her when aside from those of the two admirals, which were actively engaged at Santiago. she came out. • It appears that the Court of Inquiry was unanimous The passage from Cienfuegos to a point about twentytwo miles south of Santiago was made with as much dis in its findings of fact and unanimous in its expressions of patch as was possible while keeping the squadron a unit. opinion on most of its findings of fact. No appeal is made to me from the verdict of the Court on these points The blockade of Santiago was effective. where it was unanimous. I have, however, gone care Commodore Schley was the senior officer of our squad ron off Santiago when the Spanish squadron attempted fully over the evidence on these points also. I am satis to escape on the moming of July 3, 1898. He was in ab fied that on the whole the Court did substantial justice. solute command, and is entitled to the credit due to such It should have specifically condemned the failure to en commanding officer for the glorious victory which resulted force an efficient night blockade at Santiago while Ad miral Schley was in command. On the other hand, I in the total destruction of the Spanish ships. feel that there is a reasonable doubt whether he did not George Dewev, move his squadron with sufficient expedition from port Admiral, U. S. N. to port. The Court is a unit in condemning Admiral Sam. C. Lemlv, Schley's action on the point where it seems to me he Judge Advocate General. U.S. A"., Judge Advocate. most gravely erred; his " retrograde movement " when RECOMMENDATION. he abandoned the blockade, and his disobedience of In view of the length of time which has elapsed since orders and misstatement of facts in relation thereto. It the occurrence of the events of the Santiago campaign, be remembered, however, that the majority of the court recommends no further proceedings be had in should these actions which the Court censures occurred five the premises. George Dewev weeks or more before the fight itself; and it certainly seems that if Admiral Schley's actions were censurable Admiral, U. S. N., President. he should not have been left as second in command Sam. C. Lemlv, under Admiral Sampson. His offenses were in effect Judge Advocate General, U. S. N., Judge Advocate. condoned when he was not called to account for them. THE DECISION OF THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY. Admiral Sampson, after the fight, in an official letter to The department has read the testimony in this case, the Department alluded for the first time to Admiral the arguments of counsel at the trial, the court's findings Schley's " reprehensible conduct " six weeks previously. of fact, opinion and recommendation, the individual mem If Admiral Schley was guilty of reprehensible conduct of orandum of the presiding member, the statement of ex a kind which called for such notice from Admiral Samp ceptions to the said findings and opinion by the applicant; son, then Admiral Sampson ought not to have left him the reply to said statement by the judge advocate of the as senior officer of the blockading squadron on the 3d of court and his assistant, and the brief this day submitted July, when he (Sampson) steamed away on his proper by counsel for Rear-Admiral Sampson traversing the pre errand of communication with General Shafter. siding member's view as to who was in command at the We can therefore for our present purposes dismiss battle of Santiago. consideration of so much of the appeal as relates to any And, after careful consideration, the findings of fact thing except the battle. As regards this, the point raised and the opinion of the full court are approved. in the appeal is between Admiral Sampson and Admiral As to the point on which the presiding member differs Schley, as to which was in command, and as to which from the opinion of the majority of the court, the opinion was entitled to the credit, if either of them was really en of the majority is approved. titled to any unusual and preeminent credit by any As to the further expression of his views by the same special exhibition of genius, skill and courage. The member with regard to the questions of command on the Court could have considered both of these questions, but morning of July 3. 1898, and of the title to credit for the as a matter of fact it unanimously excluded evidence ensuing victory, the condui t of the court in making no offered upon them, and through its president announced finding and rendering no opinion on those questions is its refusal to hear Admiral Sampson's side at all; and in approved — indeed, it could with propriety take no other view of such exclusion the majority of the Court acted course, evidence on these questions during the inquiry with entire propriety in not expressing any opinion on having been excluded by the court. these points. The matter has, however, been raised by The department approves of the recommendation of the President of the Court. Moreover, it is the point the court that no further proceedings be had in the pre upon which Admiral Schleyin his appeal lays most stress, mises. and which he especially asks me to consider. I have labors Theofdepartment the wholerecords court. its appreciation , 71 T of the arduous therefore carefully investigated this matter also, and have informed myself upon it from the best sources of infor John D. Long, mation at my command. Secretary of the Navy. The appeal of Admiral Schley to me is not, as to this, THE MEMORANDUM OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE the chief point he raises, really an appeal from the deci UNITED STATES UPON THE APPEAL. sion of the Court of Inquiry. Kive-sixths of the appeal White House, February 18, 100:. is devoted to this question of command and credit; that I have received the appeal of Admiral Schley and the is, to matter which the Court of Inquiry did not consider. It is in effect an appeal from the action of President answer thereto from the Navy Department. I have ex
