Sampson-Schley Controversy
13 DECEMBER 1901
SAMPSON-SCHLEY CONTROVERSY
The naval battle of Santiago on 3 July 1898 had been a pivotal victory in the Spanish-American war, despite some initial miscues. The overall commander, Acting RADM William T. Sampson, had gone ashore hours before the battle to confer with Army commanders. On-scene command fell to CAPT Winfield S. Schley in the cruiser BROOKLYN (ACR-3), who, when he observed the lead Spanish warship emerging from the harbor, ordered an inscrutable turn to port, away from the enemy cruiser. BROOKLYN completed a 270o loop to finally reach the proper heading, and in doing so crossed the path of the battleship TEXAS, who was forced to back all her engines. Sampson heard the gunfire from ashore and returned in the cruiser NEW YORK (ACR-2) only to find he had missed most of the action.
Newspaper columns of the day sang the praises of CAPT Schley, to whom the lion’s share of the credit for the victory was given. Out of respect for his commanding officer, Schley prepared a telegram laying credit for the victory at the feet of Sampson. Sampson happily forwarded Schley’s telegram to SECNAV but appended it with a secret letter criticizing Schley’s dilatory conduct a month earlier in establishing the initial blockade of Santiago. This secret letter came to light a few months later as Congress was considering the promotions of Schley, Sampson, and George Dewey to the permanent grade of RADM. Schley was outraged, and his strong letter of protest sidelined plans to advance Sampson several slots above Schley on the seniority list.
The issue rested for two years until the respected historian Edgar Maclay published volume III of A History of the United States Navy, a text then in use at the Naval Academy. In it, Maclay roundly criticized Schley’s actions before and during the battle, hinting even at Schley’s cowardice. Again, Schley was outraged and requested a special Board of Inquiry into his conduct at the battle. Secretary of the Navy John D. Long reluctantly convened the Board, which deliberated over 40 days. Their majority opinion, released this day, sided with Sampson (though Board president RADM George Dewey authored the minority opinion supporting Schley). This only incensed Schley the further, who appealed directly to President Theodore Roosevelt.
By now, the squabbling between otherwise respected naval officers had embarrassed the Navy substantially. And after reviewing the entire case, Roosevelt approved the findings of the majority. Schley continued his protestations until a frustrated Roosevelt arbitrarily declared the case closed. The controversy split the senior Navy leadership between pro- and anti-Schley factions, a rift that remained until WWI intervened.
Watch for more “Today in Naval History” 20 DEC 22
CAPT James Bloom, Ret.
Beach, Edward L. The United States Navy: 200 Years. New York, NY: Henry Holt Co., 1986, pp. 362-65.
Langley, Harold D. “Winfield S. Schley and Santiago: A New Look at an Old Controversy.” IN: James C. Bradford. Crucible of Empire: The Spanish American War & its Aftermath. Annapolis, MD: USNI Press, 1993, pp. 69-98.
Maclay, Edgar Stanton. A History of the United States Navy: From 1775 to 1901, Vol III. New York, NY: D. Appleton and Co., 1901, pp. 363-66.
Potter, E.B. Sea Power: A Naval History, 2nd ed. Annapolis, MD: USNI Press, 1981, p. 185.
Sweetman, Jack. American Naval History: An Illustrated Chronology of the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps, 1775-Present, 2nd ed. Annapolis, MD: USNI Press, 1991, p. 116.
ADDITIONAL NOTES: The Sampson-Schley controversy ranks with Tailhook as one of the greatest public image debacles in our Navy’s history. The squabbling over an essentially vainglorious issue–who deserved credit for the one-sided victory at Santiago–tarnished the image of the Naval officer in favor of that of the Army officer. The pro-Schley lobby was led by the respected George Dewey with the anti-Schley side voiced by War College pillars Alfred T. Mahan and Stephen B. Luce. Ironically, Edward Beach points out that in truth, neither Sampson nor Schley had planned for the unexpected daylight breakout of the Spanish. Neither was Schley “in command” of the fleet that morning. The record shows he gave commands only to his flagship BROOKLYN. In reality, every ship captain present had acted on his own in tackling the obvious situation that presented.
As a result of the controversy, Maclay’s test was withdrawn from the curriculum at the Naval Academy. Few copies of volume III were printed and even fewer survive today.
