48th OONciREh^Sj \ HOUSE OF BEPRESBKTATIVES. i Mis. Doc. 1st Session. ( \ Ko. 66. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, FOETY-EIGHTH OONGEESS. IMEMIJBICRS Oin THE SXJI3COM;M:iTTEE1. HON. HUGH BUCHANAN. " WM. McADOO. *' CHAS. A. BOUTELLE. Official Stenographer, H. H. ALEXANDER. WASHIlSrGTON: GOVERNMENT PBINTINa OFFICE. 1884. ^0 JAN r ^ 1903 D. otD. 5 o JEANNETTE INQUIRY. House of Eepresentatives, EooM OF Committee on Naval Affairs, Washington^ D, C, Saturday, April 5, 1884. Sir : Your petitioner would respectfully submit the follownig memorial in reference to the Jeannette Arctic Expedition, to the manner such expedition was conducted, the conduct of the surviving members, and the manner of investigation adopted by the Naval Court of Inquiry under the joint resolution of Congress providing for the same: First. That in the month of July, 1879, Jerome J. Collins, then a citizen of the United States, and director of the New York Herald weather service, joined the United States Arctic steamer Jeannette in the capacity of meteorologist and correspondent of the New York Herald. Second. That on and after the month of September, 1879, the said Jerome J. Collins was, with other members of the expedition, treated with every indignity and out- rage, even to being deprived of all the scientific instruments and appliances of his position as meteorologist of the expedition ; that he was prevented from performing the proper work and duties of his office. Third. That on or about the end of the year 1879, and while the Arctic steamer Jeannette was held in the ice, the said Jerome J. Collins was placed under suspen- sion or arrest by the commanding officer of the expedition, and that he remained so until he died of starvation and cold on the bank of the River Lena, in Northern Si- beria. Fourth. That during the month of June, 1881, the Arctic steamer Jeannette, at that time held fast and drifting with the ice, was crushed and sank, and the officers and crew, in three parties, commenced their retreat southward towards the Siberian coast; that one party, under the command of Lieutenant Chipp, U. S. N., was never found, and is supposed to have perished during a great storm, with his companions ; that another party, under the command of Lieut. G. W. De Long, U. S. N., landed on the Lena delta, and traveled along the line of the river, hoping to find a settlement and relief; that at last, the party having consumed their last food and being threatened with starvation, Lieutenant De Long sent two of his party ahead to find assistance ; that the two men so sent, Nindemann and Noros, traveled ahead until found by natives in a frozen and starving condition ; that the party under the command of Lieutenant De Long, failing to find natives and supplies, and receiving no svord from Nindemann and Noros, the party including Lieutenant De Long, Mr. Jerome J. Collins, Dr. Am- bler, and the seamen, died from starvation and cold during the last days of the month of October, 1881. Fifth. That the third party, under the command of Chief Engineer Melville, United I JEANNETTE INQUIRY. States Navy, after weathering the storm, did on the 26th day of September, 1881, find a place of safety, and a base of supplies, several of the members of the party being at this time in a disabled condition. That the records show that on the 3d day of Octo- ber following, the said Melville had fully recovered, and with him all his men, and that several of the party urged him to push ahead and not delay, several volunteer- ing to go in search of their missing shipmates. That finally, about the middle of the month of October, the said Melville sent an ignorant exile named Kusmah, resident in that place, to Buluu, refusing permission to any of the party to accompany him. That at this time nor any subsequent period up to the 29th day of October did said Melville, he being then in command, use any effort or means to obtain information as to the condition or location of the two missing parties. That even at the time Mel- ville sent the exile Kusmah to Bulun, he gave no directions or adopted no means for spreading the news of the missing boats, although surviving members of the expedi- tion claim that the said Melville knew the route De Long would take in his retreat down the river Lena. That the exile Kusmah, sent to Bulun, returned on the 29th day of October, bringing a message from Nindemaun and Noros stating that the cap- tain's (De Long's) party were in a starving condition and in need of immediate assist- ance ; and that the said Melville then, after delaying thirty-three days at Gloomvia- locke without making any efforts to succor his comrades, at last went to the rescue, it is alleged, stating that they would be all dead. That the evidence offered to the naval court, and which the undersigned is prepared to furnish, and that has already and will be further given by the survivors, goes to show, beyond any reasonable doubt, that had the said Melville performed the duty devolving upon him as the commander of the party, and obeyed the directions given him by Lieutenant De Long to im- mediately communicate with the Russian authorities, and gone to the rescue and con- ducted a search for the captain's part;y, each and every member of that party, with the exception of Erickson, would have been rescued and alive to-day. Sixth. That on and after the arrival of a number of survivors of the expedition reached this country a joint resolution was passed by Congress directing the Secre- tary of the Navy to appoint a court of inquiry into the loss of the Arctic steamer Jean- nette and the conduct of the officers and men ; that the said naval court refused to admit or allow to be given valuable testimony, and that said court ruled out nearly every question that would bring out the true history of the expedition ; that many of the survivors were not permitted to give their full and free testimony, and that the naval inquiry was so conducted that all possible chance or possibility of the truth coming out was destroyed; that many of the witnesses, it is alleged by competent authority, were at the time dependent upon, under the jurisdiction of, and afraid of the persecution of the Naval Department ; that the official stenographer of the court jjublicly declared in writing that important and valuable testimony was suppressed, and that the proceedings of said court were calculated to cover up all matters relat- ing to the expedition. Respectfully, DANIEL F. COLLINS, M. D. Hon. John G. Carlisle, Spealcer House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. Whereas a petition has been presented to the honorable Speaker of the House of Representatives resj)ectfully representing the condition of the*Jeannette Arctic Ex- pedition, and the conduct of the surviving members, and the manner of the investiga- tion adopted by the Naval Court of Inquiry under the joint resolution of Congress pro- I JEANNETTE INQUIRY. vidiiig for tlie same ; and inasmucli as said facts involve the honor and humanity of of- iicers in the United States service, as well as a proper respect for those who perished in the expedition ; and inasmuch as the Naval Court of Inquiry refused to admit or allow, as it is alleged, valuable testimony to be given to bring out the facts of the case in the interest of truth and history : Therefore, Be it resolved, That the Committee on Naval Affairs of this House be directed to in- vestigat the facts connected with said expedition and the alleged unofficerlike and inhumane conduct therein ; and that the said committee be authorized to send for persons and papers, and to employ a stenographer. Hon. Hugh BuchaDan, Hon. William McAdoo, and Hon. Charles A. Boutelle, a subcommittee appointed by the Committee on Naval Affairs to make the investigation required by the foregoing resolution, met at 11.30 a. m., when the following proceedings were had : Hon. George M. Curtis appeared as representing Dr. D. F. Collins, and Hon. William H. Arnoux as representing Mrs. Emma De Long and Mr. G. W. Melville. Mr. Boutelle. Mr. Chairman, I will state briefly that at the meet- ing of the subcommittee held on Monday which Dr. Collins had been subpoenaed to attend, in the unavoidable absence of the chairman of the committee it was deemed inadvisable for him to go over the whole of his statement, as he might be obliged to make it over again, and two members of the subcommittee then present decidcvi to postpone the hearing until to-day, at which time it was hoped that all the members would be present. Dr. Collins was notified at that time to be present and a number of witnesses in the case also were subpoenaed with the purpose of giving Dr. Collins an opportunity this morning to state the general nature of the evidence which he desires to present and the gen- eral objects which he has in view on this investigation. As the doctor is now here, I think it might perhaps be well for him to go on and out- line the case. Mr. Arnoux. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, before that is done I would like to have certain matt^^rs brought to your at- tention as preliminary. In the first place I wish to have it appear be- fore you either by the admission of the other side — that is, Dr. Collins or his counsel — or by proof that the Court of Inquiry originated in a letter of Daniel F. Collins to Hon. William D.Washburn, of Minnesota, fully stating all points of complaint. Mr. Curtis. I am not advised, and that is not a matter preliminar3\ That is a matter strictly of proof. Mr. Arnoux. Then I will proceed. Mr. Curtis. First, you state that I am bound to state the proposi- tion as you make it. Mr. Arnoux. That is exactly it. Mr. Curtis. Kow, in speaking of the Board of Inquiry, you are evi- dently speaking of something which we have not yet reached. We shall not reach it until we get into the proof. When we do reach it we will treat it as the committee deem proper. There are preliminary matters to which I was about to call the attention of the committee, and which I would like to submit after Judge Arnoux has got through. Mr. Arnoux. The second point is that the joint resolution of Co ti- gress and the instructions to the court were based on that letter of Dr. Collins, and covered every point in it. IJQ* JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Mr. BoUTELLE. Let me ask the counsel if, in using the term " court," he means this subcommittee. , . ., ^^ ^ i. t Mr Arnoux. No, sir; I am speakmg about the Court of Inquiry. Third, that the Collinses had full opportunity to appear before the court and introduce evidence, and persistently failed to appear, although they made no complaint of, or objection to, the constitution or conduct of the court Fourth, that they sent questions to be put to the witnesses, which were put, and all that were appropriate were answered ; and every point they made was duly inquired into, notwithstanding their default of appearance. Fifth, that the court was conducted openly, lairly, and with a full development of all facts material to the object of the inquiry. In asking these facts preliminarily, I will state that my purpose is this : That upon these facts being admitted or shown, this investigation should be stopped as unnecessary, or else that before proceeding the complain- ant shall state, first, exactly what he proposed to prove ; second, the witnesses or documents by which he proposes to prove it; third, that the facts are in such material addition to those which appeared and which were considered by the Court of Inquiry as to justify another in- vestigation; and, fourth, the erroneous rulings of the Court ot Inquiry. Now, the reason for taking the first position is this : First, I submit that you have before you the record of the Court of Inquiry. Turn to the first page and you will see that the instructions convening this Court of Inquiry were in conformity with a joint resolution of Con- gress ai)proved August 2, 1882. That is higher than an investiga- tion ordered by one branch of Congress. Here was a joint resolu- tion approved by the President. It is to be assumed that that court proceeded according to law. You are not ready to say, and certainly would not be ready at any moment, when the court was convened under such circumstances, to come forward and either impugn the conduct ot that court or travel over the record which that court has made. It must, in other words, be assumed by you that this court so directed, proceed- ing without any complaint or objection on the part of any one, holding open sessions, examining all witnesses that were called here, by the evi- dence which was adduced. It is to be presumed, I say, that the court discharged its duties faithfully, and to make it subject to attack in the present condition ot things would not be according to the orderly admin- istration of public affairs, in my judgment ; and therefore it seems to me that vou should, as a preliminary, understand these matters, and have the points, if the investigation is to proceed at all, brought right down to the things which this Court of Inquiry failed to do, in the judgment of this committee. Now that, it seems to me, is in accord with the res- ^ Mr Curtis (interposing). I do not wish to.interrupt the gentleman, but i submit to the committee whether he is proceeding in order in this argument, and to what he is addressing himself before the com- mittee before we have entered at all into the investigation. The Chairman. My understanding is that one point is that this in- vestigation ought not to proceed. Mr. Arnoux. That is it, sir. The Chairman. That it ought not to be had ? Mr. Arnoux. That it ought not to be had. x 4. •. The Chairman. That is one point, and if it is had, to what extent it shall go? Mr. Arnoux. That is it, sir. ...,..,. 1 The Chairman. Those, I understand, are the points that the counsel makes. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 6 Mr. Arnoux. Exactly. Fowl submit that that is a matter which is preliminary matter, which should be determined at the outset of an in- vestigation of this character ; in the first place whether you should pro- ceed, whether you have a right, for instance, to make a report against that which has' been done under the sanction of a joint resolution of Con- gress approved by the President. What can your investigation be as against an investigation ordered by that which is a higher power than yours, that is a joint resolution? And if you do order it, what are you going to order ? And it seems to me that it ought not to pre- vail and that this investigation ought not to be permitted to pre- vail at all over any part of the record which has been made. The resolution adopted by Congress has a preamble, and it is not necessary to say to the chairman of this committee, who has had sufficient expe- rience, that in law the preamble limits the resolution. Now, that pre- amble points to matters which were not investigated in the Court of In- quiry, and therefore the resolution must be deemed to be limited to the investigation of such matters. If you hold that it is proper to make this investigation, it should be limited to that extent. If you will read the preamble you will then see what is pointed out. Further than that, if you read the petition upon which the preamble is placed, you will see that it only touches the points which I have made as the points of limi- tation on this investigation. I respectfully submit, therefore, that un- der the view that I entertain of this matter this investigation should not proceed ; that it should be reported back to Congress or to the com- mittee with the information that there has been a com|)lete, full investi- gation made of all the charges ; that the court made its findings upon every question which arose; that that has been approved by the Secre- tary of the Navy, and that therefore the matters have been investigated and concluded ; but if this committee should not take that view, then that they should say how far this investigation is to proceed, and whether it should be permitted to travel over the large mass of evidence and the general ground which has been taken by the Court of Inquiry. Mr. Curtis. I presume the gentleman has presented his propositions in all seriousness, and therefore it is proper that I should say something in reply, more especially as the learned gentleman considered that he was speaking pertinently to some question. All that he has stated here might or might not have been properly presented in the House of Eep- resentatives when this resolution was before it, and, as I am instructed, it is just the argument that is used by the opponents Mr. BouTELLE. If the counsel will excuse me, I was simply suggest- ing to the chairman that we were proceeding informally; that we have no official cognizance whom you gentlemen are representing. Mr. Curtis. I have the honor to represent Dr. Collins and his family. Judge Arnoux represents, I believe, Mrs. De Long and several others of the survivors, and perhaps some other persons. Mr. BouTELLE. I suppose it had better be a matter of record. Mr. Arnoux. I am instructed to appear for Mrs. Emma De Long and Mr. George W. Melville, and I suppose incidentally any of the others who may have need of counsel in this investigation. Mr. Curtis. I was about to observe that I am instructed that this very argument was made, when this resolution was before the House, for the purpose of stifling this investigation. Mr. Arnoux. There was not the slightest opposition to it. Mr. Curtis. I am speaking as I am instructed. Mr. Arnoux. I did not mean, of course, to make any comment to you. 4 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. I meant to say it does not appear on the Congressional Eecord. It never appeared that there was any objection. Mr. Curtis. You mean by the Congressional Eecord? Mr. Arnoux. I mean that the Congressional Kecord does not show that there was any debate upon it at all, but that the resolution was brought in and passed without any thought of opposition. Mr. BouTELLE. There was no debate. Mr. Curtis. I am simply saying that I am instructed that it was just that sort of argument that was used in private The Chairman (interposing). The committee do not think it neces- sary to hear from you on this question. Mr. Curtis. I trust not, sir. The Chairman. The committee think that this resolution here re- quires this investigation, as it recognizes the fact that the investigation of the Court of Inquiry had been held. The preamble and resolution recognize that fact; and notwithstanding that the Court of Inquiry had been held, the resolution requires that this investigation be had never- theless. So that we think, so far as the investigation is concerned, that^ although tiie Court of Inquiry has been held, this resolution makes it in- cumbent upon this committee to go on with this investigation and carry out the purport of the resolution. Mr. Arnoux. Will you, Mr. Chairman, pass upon the second resolu- tion ? Mr. Curtis. I was about to say that I almost beg the committee's par- don for arguing knj of these propositions; but as a matter of deference to the learned counsel who has presented them I wdll say a word or two in reference to both, and that I may not be tempted to misrepresent him in any respect I will read his proposition : That tbe resolution of Cousjress and the instructions to the court were based on that letter and covered every point in it. I have just read the second proposition referring to the letter of Col- lins. It is wholly immaterial on what the resolution of Congress was based. The only question for this committee to determine is, Was the resolution passed ! That resolution is before you, and you have read it. That the Collinses had full opportunity to appear before the court and introduce ev- idence, and persistently failed to appear, although they made no complaint of or ob- jection to the constitution or conduct of the court. But a word in regard to that. We may consider this Board of Inquiry and its investigations entirely in the nature of a court-martial, and it has no more to do with the legal rights vested in Dr. Collins, or any of his family — has no more to do with the actual facts and the history of this transaction — than the attempt of my learned friend to strangle this investigation at the outset has to do with any legal purpose. I chal- lenge my learned friend to show where conrts-martial, either in this land or in the old country, were or can ever be superior to the legisla- tive functions of the land. The legislative power is the supreme power. It is the bosom of jurisdiction, ana it is the last resort. That has been established in so many decisions that it is useless to consume time ui)on it. But the monstrous proposition is presented to a distinguished com- mittee of the House of Congress, that after Congress has said substan- tially by its vote — this Board of Inquiry having failed of its purpose, it not having done justice, but suppressed the truth — the monstrous proposition is made Mr. BouTELLE (Interposing). I beg the gentleman's pardon; the resolution does not state that. V JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 5 Mr. Curtis. Not in words. Mr. BouTELLE. It states that it is alleged. The House has not passed upon that. Mr. Curtis. I am assuming that the action of the House would jus- tify that construction. You are quite right in regard to the language of the resolution. I will not trespass further upon the patience of the committee in that respect, but I would like to call the attention of the committee to a manifest injustice. I presume that these i^rinted propo- sitions were prepared by my learned friend — Upon these facts being admitted or shown. That we should admit facts without color and authority of law to ad- mit them, or that they should be permitted to show facts unsupported by color or authority of law — Ask to have the investigation stopped as unnecessary. Mr. Arnoux. That has been passed upon, judge. Mr. Curtis. Wait a minute. Congress has said that it necessary. Or else, that before proceeding the complainant shall state exactly what he pro- poses to prove. Where is the authority in a legislative or judicial body for that? Where is the precedent in the history of any country for that? Is he imbecile enough to expose his plan of action to the ready corps of wit- nesses on the other side? And, second, the witnesses or documents by which he proposes to prove it. Now, I presume the chairman is a lawyer, judging from his treatment of the question that has come before him. You have here a monstrous proposition. And what gives them this extraordinary confidence to make these propositions? And shall show that the facts are in such material addition to those which appeared and were considered by the Court of Inquiry as to justify an investigation. l^ou have your resolution. But I say here that we do propose to attack the finding of the Board of Inquiry, and we do propose to show that for some reason or other, matter, vital and material, most impor- tant to history and to the vindication of individuals, was suppressed j and, I believe, as I am instmcted, colusively suppressed. It is not for me in the interest of my client, who for years has fought and struggled against a mighty combination, to mince words. We are here as we were at the door of Congress itself, searching after but one thing— the truth. And we are met at the outset with this halter, which we are coolly asked to put around our own necks. Nothing, in my judg- ment, equals the remarkable character of these propositions except the audacity with which they are couched. I do not think it is necessary, if the committee please, to go into any elaborate argument in regard to these propositions. They speak for themselves. Mr. Arnoux. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen : I have not the gift of eloquence and cannot therefore use words which the counsel on the other side has such a happy faculty of uc>ing. I^evertheless, I am satisfied that a plain presentation of this matter will show that we have asked nothing that is unusual or improper. In the first place, the chairman in the discharge of his functions as judge probably never had a case come before him that the counsel did not in the beginning lay before the -court the facts which he intended to prove. So that asking it here is nothing new, strange, or surprising. In addition to that, as one inves- 6 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. tigation has been had at the request of these identical parties, instead of its being collusive — and that was the purport of doing this ; it was- done at their interest, at their request before — they stand very much in the position of a party who asks a new trial on the ground either of newly discovered evidence or evidence improperly rejected by the pre- vious court. Now, in such a transaction as that, which is familiar to you, Mr. Chairman, what is requisite ? What do you always as a judge require ? You require that the other side shall point out the errOrs that were committed, shall state the evidence or effect of the evidence which was rejected. For I take it, however interesting or however valuable a contribution to history such an investigation as this might become, that is not the purpose of Congressional committees, to make or perpetuate a history of any transaction simply for the purpose of making history, and therefore you are not to sit here for the purpose of making a hiKtory. But you are to sit here to make an investiga- tion of anything that needs to be investigated in the discharge of this matter; and therefore, I submit, notwithstanding the language of the eloquent gentleman who talks of collusion and various other matters with a very sonorous ring, that I think have no foundation in fact and will make no lodgment in the minds of the committee — I submit, as I did before, with greater confidence after listening to what he had to say, that you will feel that the discharge of your duty re- quires just what we have asked in the second branch of this proposi- tion, that if this investigation goes forward they shall state what they propose to prove, and what errors were made or evidence was excluded in the other investigation, and that you will limit yourselves to those iadditional facts, and not make an investigation that shall last, as thia one did, 85 days, with the additional testimony that it may be neces- sary to bring, and go beyond that time to make an investigation which should be brief and definite and conclusive so far as your body is con- cerned. Mr. Curtis. If the committee please, but one word. If you have read this record you will find that if Collins wrote a thousand letters asking for the court of inquiry, he was no prophet as to the result. There is not a spot in it where his rights are protected by any human being, and evidence — I am speaking advisedly, because I have read it — evidence is excluded here which should have called the blush of shame to the cheeks of those judges. Why was that evidence excluded"^ We have our theory. I will ask this committee a question. I will argue no more about this. As General Butler said once, "It is hard to kick against nothing." Did you ever hear before issue was joined, before the jury was impanelled and the case opened, such an extraordinary demand as the gent'eman makes now, and did you ever hear on a motion for a new trial any such extraordinary demand made. To save time (the learned gen- tleman was not here the other day), as Mr. Boutelle, the gentle- man from Maine, has informed the chairman, we agreed— so that the time should be abbreviated, so that it should not be lengthened out by a formal opening — that Mr. Collins should state his case. That he proposes to do. Before he has entered upon that the learned gen- tleman asks him to do certain things. When we arrive at a proper place in the proof, and the legal objection is made that it is res adjudi- cata, this matter that was properly before the Board of Inquiry, then then my learned friend can be heard upon that particular matter or element or essence in the proof. But who ever heard questions of proof discussed in advance; who ever heard assumed what were to be the matters of evidence ? My learned friend must remember that soire JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 7 of the most illustrious lawyers of this country are members of this House, and they will not listen in patience, it seems to me, to such a proposition. The Chairman. The committee are of the opinion that under this resolution every fact in connection with the conduct of the expedition and the conduct of the officers commanding it is a matter of inquiry under this resolution. Mr. BouTELLE. In the discretion of the committee. The* Chairman. That is what I mean. That it embraces all the facts of the expedition anapers you desire. If you cannot describe them particularly, then describe them generally. Mr. Curtis. I say connected with the Jeannette expedition. Mr. Boutelle. Do you want all the originals 1? Mr. Curtis. No, sir. Those found to be originals we can retain. Mr. Arnoux. Why not ask them to send all except those in the book ? Mr. Curtis. Who is to determine that? Mr. Boutelle. Who is to determine after we get them ? Mr. Curtis. The committee. Mr. Boutelle. I should rather be excused from that task unless it is absolutely essential. JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 9 Mr Curtis. You are the ones that must pass on that question. Mr Arnoux. As these gentlemen know, there are some of them m the book. Then they can say that those that come are not here if there is any omission. . . , , ., Mr. Curtis. Will the committee hold that question m abeyance until the next nieetiuff ? Mr BouTELLE. There is no trouble about this, Mr. Chairman. Of course it is desired by the committee that all persons interested in the inquiry shall have access to every paper that can throw light upon it It is only a question what papers are wanted, and the gentlemen would hardly impose upon the committee the task of overhauhng them to see what we wanted. If there is any method indicated by the gen- tlemen themselves, we can require the Navy Department to furnish those, and allow them to look over them and see what papers they want to prove. r^ ^ T 1 J Mr. Curtis. Could it be arranged in this way? Could you send a letter to the Department requesting them to give Mr. Colhns every facility of examining all the charts and maps and diagrams connected with that expedition ? ..,.,. i ,xr The Chairman. I do not think we have any power of that kind. VYe have the power to send for the papers and have them brought. Mr. Curtis. I will join in any such request. Mr. BouTELLE. The only trouble is that, in making any request tor papers, there might be a half a cart-load of them, and if the Secretary used his discretion in the matter he might be subjected to the criticism of leaving out what you want. We made a request similar to that at the outset, covering all the books and papers. The Chairman. Perhaps it would be best to read this letter. | Read- ing:] Navy Department, Washington, March 11, 1884. Sir • In reply to tlie letter dated March 4, from the Committee on Naval Affairs, calliuo- the attention of this Department to the resolution adopted by the House of Repre'lentatives on March 3, directing the committee 'Ho investigate the facts con- nected with the Jeannette Arctic expedition, and the alleged unofflcer like and inhu- mane conduct therein," I have the honor to transmit herewith a copy of the proceed- ings of the naval court of inquiry (House Executive Document No. 108, Forty-seventh Cono'ress second session), which fully investigated the whole subject, in pursuance of a ioint resolution of Congress of August 8, 1882. The findings of the court were ap- proved by the Department on February 17 and April 23, 1883. (Pages 266, 267, and 278 ^ Your attention is specially called to the index to exhibits on page 283 and to the list of other documentary evidence on page 284 of the printed record. Exhibits A to U V, inclusive, 70 in number, are appended to and printed with the record; also Exhibits V W and W X, which are referred to on page 284 as not appended, but which it was subsequently concluded to annex, ., , ^, , ^ . i r. Mr J J Collins's memorandum book was used by the court for reference and after- wards returned to Mr. B. A. Collins, a brother and legal representative of the deceased. It was not appended to the report, although by an error on page 284 the contrary is Therou^h draft of Lieutenant Commander De Long's report to the Secretary of the Navy will*also be found in the second appendix of the printed record, commencing on page 326, as well as Chief Engineer Melville's "Report of Trip to Henrietta Island," it having been decided to annex these after the list was prepared. The original medical journal kept by Dr. Ambler is on file in the Bureau of Medicine and Surc^ery, together with a copy of his diary, the original having been delivered to his brother and legal representative, Mr. Edward Ambler, of Fauquier County, Vir- ginia These were not introduced in evidence, although the court was fully aware of their existence and contents, for the reason that they were regarded as irrelevant to thesubiect-matter of the inquiry. , ^t- x x^ ^ The loo-books of the Jeannette and the private journal of Lieutenant-Commander De Longhand his ice-journal, so called, are not printed in the record. The original books are on file at the Department, together with copies of the private journal and 10 * JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. the ice-journal, the originals of which have been delivered to Mrs. De Long These are voluminous, and the preparation of copies would involve a large amount of cler- ical labor. They can, however, be shown to the committee upon the understandino- that they will be promptly returned to the Department. In view of certain reckless statements in the petition of Dr. Daniel F Collins printed in the Congressional Record of March 4, 1884, upon which the resolution of the House was based, I deem it my duty to state that every facility was tendered by this Department to enable the relatives of Mr. Jerome J. Collins to attend the sittings of the court of inquiry; tbat both the petitioner and Mr. Bernard A. Collins, as a brother and legal representative of the deceased, were informed of their right to be present in person or by counsel, but they declined thus to appear at any time and only requested that they might be represented before the court by judge-advocate Their request was duly complied with, and they were accordingly represented by Occasion is also taken by me to assert that all aspersions contained in the petition ot Doctor Collins upon the heroic Lieutenant-Commander Geo. W. De Long the un tirmg and intrepid chief engineer, George W. Melville, the faithful members of the court of inquiry and the Navy Department, are.untrue and unjust; and that it is in my opinion highly inexpedient, as a second pitiless sacrilege, to again tear open the graves of the dead for the purpose of indecently calling public attention to what the court of inquiry correctly termed "trivial difficulties, such as occur on shipboard even under the most favorable circumstances, and which had no influence in brino-ing about the disasters of the expedition and no pernicious effect upon its general con- Very respectfully, WM. E. CHANDLER, Hon.S.S.Cox, Secretary of m Navy. Chairman Committee on Naval Affairs, House of Representatives. Mr. Curtis. We do not want that letter as matter of evidence. We simply want to find these books. The Chairman. This is not brought in as evidence, but simplj^ as a reply to sending the record, and he indicates what is attached to the record and those which are not attached to the record, as I suppose He says you can have the books by returning them to the Kavy De- partment. So that I do not think there is any trouble on that score. Mr. Curtis. That letter is not to be considered as containing the conclusions or opinions of the Secretary as an element of proof in this case. The Chairman. ISTot at all. It was just written as information in reply to a letter requesting the record to be sent here. Mr. Curtis. Now, if the committee please, there is one other thing, and I shall trespass no more on your patience. At the last meeting the subject was brought before the committee of a commission to examine John P. Jackson in Berlin. He is the Herald correspondent in that city. It is impossible for him to arrive to take part in this investiga- tion as an oral witness, and I suggested at the last meeting of the com- mittee that interrogatories be framed by us and cross-interrogatories be framed by the learned counsel on the other side, and that all be sent to the Secretary of State, if he, in your judgment, is the proper oflBcer to send them to, with the request that he forward them to Berlin to the American minister there, or the consul, or whoever the proper officer may be, and let the evidence be taken in the nature of a deposi- tion. Do you agree to that Mr. Arnoux? Mr. Arnoux. I have no objection if the committee deem the inquiries to be relevant. Mr. BouTELLE. You had better draw the interrogatories up and submit them to the committee. Mr. Curtis. Yes, we intend to do that. I will state that the object of this commission is to show the statements made by sundry survivors JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 11 when they were first interviewed by this gentleman in Berlin, when they were fresh from the scene of their suffering, and in an investigation of this character it is deemed by us very important. Mr. BouTELLE. Statements made to him by the survivors ? Mr. Curtis. Yes, when he saw them fresh from their journey. Mr. Arnoux. I submit that that would not be competent. If they are survivors thej^ can be put under oath in regard to their evidence. This was not evidence given under oath and their recollection of what actually took place must be just as good as the recollection of the gen- tleman in Berlin of what they told him. Mr. Curtis. Supposing the recollection of some of them might have been affected by climate ; supposing they might have been affected by other influences ? Mr. BouTELLE. Would they be more likely to be affected than the memory of this gentleman ? Mr. Curtis. I think so 5 they might. But certainly if a person goes upon the stand, for instance, and swears to a state of facts it cannot be contended that the other side will not be permitted to show that he has made a different statement to a disinterested person. The Chairman. No, and there is where the difficulty comes in at present. My understanding of the rule is that that is used by way of impeachment of ? witness. A witness testifies, and if he has had a conversation with an outside party on the same subject-matter before, his attention is to be called to that fact, the time, place, and circum- stance, and as to who were present and where the conversation was had, and asked if at that time and under those circumstances he did not state so and so to A B or C D. He may admit it when his memory is refreshed in that way, but if he denies it you have the right to impeach his evidence by the introduction of that. Mr. Arnoux. Provided his statement is a material one. The Chairman. Yes j a material statement, as a matter of course. Mr. Curtis. Then we will leave it until that time arrives and then we will raise the question. Mr. Arnoux. I will suggest that it may facilitate things by drawing up the interrogatories, so that when the time comes they may go with- out delay. Mr. Curtis. My object was to abbreviate the matter as much as pos- sible. The Chairman. Yes 5 if there is no objection to it of course it might be done. Mr. Arnoux. While I object, of course I think your view is correct. But I suggest that they might be drawn up so as to expedite the matter. We hope to expedite this matter as much as we can. Mr. Curtis. I think you will find we do. Mr. Collins is ready to proceed if the committee please. The Chairman. Very well. STATEMENT OF DANIEL F. COLLINS. Mr. Collins. Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen of the committee : T am a resident of Minnesota, a physician by profession, and a brother of Jerome J. Collins, (deceased. In June, 1879, Mr. Jerome J. Collins, then the director of the New York Herald weather service, joined the Jean- nette Arctic expedition at the request of Mr. James Gordon Bennett, as meteorologist^ and also to take charge of the scientific work. In July, 1879, the Jeannette sailed from San Francisco, and after the lapse of a 12 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. certain time uews reached this country that the ship was lost, and that a number of the officers and crew had been drowned or starved to death. Before leaving on the expedition Lieutant-Commander De Long knew perfectly well the position and the duties to which my brother, Mr. Je- rome J. Collins, was assigned, and the directions in a general way that he had received from Mr. Bennett in relation to his work and duties on the expedition. He visited Washington in connection with preparation for his voyage. A few weeks prior to the departure of the expedition, he read a dispatch or a paragraph in the Washington Post in which Captain DeLong stated to the reporter that both Mr. Newcomb and Mr. Collins were simply going on the exj^edition as scientific accessories, and that the work would be entirely performed under the direction of the naval officers. This was so entirely new an arrangement or idea to Mr. Collins that he wrote Mr. Thomas B. Connerj- , then the managing editor of the New York Herald, and asked him about it. After a delay of some time he received the following telegram, the original of which was found upon his body. New York, Jpril 7. Jerome J. Collins, Herald Bureau, Washington, D. C. : Don't like to give any opinion about the question in your two letters. Your best ■course is to refer the point to Mr. Bennett. CONNERY. In other words, Mr. Connery, the managing editor of the Herald, could not make up his mind that the statements made by Captain De Long, or supposed to have been made by Captain De Long, were true, or that he was correctly reported, and thought it was so grave a matter that an -editor and attache of the Herald, going on this expedition in the capacity that he believed he was going, and acting under instructions he believed he received, to fill a position that he believed he was assigned to, that Mr. Connery directed that he should communicate directly witli Mr. Bennett on the matter. Anticipating Mr. Connery's advice, Mr. Col- lins wrote to Mr. Bennett on the subject. Mr. Bennett was then in England, and he replied under date of March 22, 1879. This letter was found upon Mr. Collins's dead body, and will be placed on record. I read it as follows : March 22, 1879. Dear Mr. Collins: I have just received your letter of the 7th instant in reference to the Washington Post interview with Captain De Long. I think you will find that he has been misrepresented, as I don't believe he could have spoken so slightingly of the scientific gentlemen connected witli the expedition. The vessel will be under naval discipline, and Captain DeLong will be in command, so that he will be my represent- ative, just as Mr. Connery is my representative at the Herald office, haviugthe com- mand and the responsibility, but glad to give every man the fullest opportunity to •distinguish himself in the performance of the duties of his special department. 1 con- sider that Captain De Long will, for my sake, as well as for the credit of the expedi- tion, afford you every facility for your work. Yours, truly, J. G. BENNETT. The expedition sailed from San Francisco, and among the papers found upon my brother's body was a memorandum or letter directed to Captain De Long in my brother's handwriting. The following extract I will read. The original I will place in the hands of the committee. He says : I have been aware from the commencement of the standing you were willing to 4i,ccord to any civilian appointed to take part in the scientific work of the expedition •" as a mere accessory " , JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 13 Mr. BouTELLE (interposing). When was this written ? Mr. Collins. This was written while on the expedition, and in rela- tion to a circumstance that occurred at the Palace Hotel in San Fran- cisco in Captain De Long's room. Mr. BouTELLE. Is the original dated ? Mr. Collins. This is not dated. I will read the extract: I have been aware from the commencement of the standing you were willing to accord to any civilian appointed to take part in the scientific work of the expedition ''as a mere accessory," to nse the expression you employed to the reporter of the Washington Post in 1879, when interviewed by him. This is the way you endeavored to give force to the statement that all scientific work required would be done by the officers of the Navy. Mr. Bennett, when asked about this said you must have been misrepresented. Mr. Connery remarked with some indignation that you never used such language. ♦ * * * Nothing in your conversation gave me any grounds for believing otherwise until during a general conversation held at your rooms at the Palace Hotel, in the course of which "interviewing" by reporters came up for discussion. You indorsed a lady's statement that the Washington Post interview was most faithfully and accurately reported, and that your very words were used, although the reporter did not appear to take any notes. About the day before the expedition sailed, or a short time before it sailed, I received a letter from my brother, from which I make the fol- lowing extract : Now, if this expedition succeeds I will have but a poor share of the laurels; but if it fails, I will naturally come in for a full share of the discredit. * * * It now turns out that I must ship as a seaman, and will not receive any document of ap- pointment from the Secretary of the Navy, because that official has no power to grant such. But he has in his secretary's memorandum that I am the meteorologist and scientific observer. I do not say that this was all arranged to reserve all the honor for the Navy.. Before Mr. Collins started to join the ship at San Francisco he called on me in Minneapolis, Minn., and among other matters we talked of the position that he was to fill and to occupy on board the Jeannette. He stated to me distinctly that an arrangement had been made or was to be made by which his status on the ship was to be provided for, and when I suggested to him the possibility that at the last moment he would be obliged to ship as a seaman, he simply laughed at me, and said there was no possibility of that owing to the statements made to him. After the ship was lost and when the first party of the survivors reached this country, I, accompanied by my brother, called upon Lieutenant Danen- hower, then stopping at the Fifth Avenue Hotel, because rumors had already reached me, that for some cause or other, Mr. Collins had been suspended or arrested while on the expedition and was deprived of and prevented from performing any of the scientific work allotted to him by Mr. Bennett as part of his duty. I met Lieutenant Danenhower and asked him what was the reason Mr. Collins was suspended or arrested,, and he at first refused to give me any information on the subject. He simply said that my mind might be at rest; that Mr. Collins's offense or transgression, or what he was suspended or arrested for, was in no way serious or grave. I asked him how long he continued under arrest and he stated that he was under arrest when the boats separated. I asked him whether there was trouble between the captain and my brother, and he said yes, there was considerable trouble between them^ and instanced at that time one of the first difficulties on board in rela- tion to one Sunday when a bear was sighted, that Mr. Nindemann, Mr. Collins, himself, and I believe there was a fourth, went after a bear and that Mr. Nindemann got beyond the others and they had to support him. He had to return to fix up the ship. The ship was for inspection ; and 14 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. that the day after they returned, an order was issued that no one should leave the ship without permission. While we were talking the rela- tives of Lieutenant Chipp asked to see Lieutenant Danenhower, and before I left, I asked him what kind of a life my brother led, what was his position on board. My brother, Mr. Collins, one of the editors of the Herald now, was present ; Danenhower in that interview stated that his life had been merely a hell in the Arctic regions for three years; De Long and he were continually quarreling and that De Long's treat- ment of my brother was such, that if he had to endure it he would have goue over the ship's side. On my brother's body was found a paper, the original of which I will place in the hands of the committee, and which I will read for their information. It is a letter of my brother, Mr. Collins, to Captain De Long. He says : Dear Sir : 1 return herewith the slip on which you require the number of ther- mometers duly marked- Mr. Arnoux. Is there any date to that? Mr. Collins. There is no date. A maximum must be supplied from one of the pocket cases, as the one I had was broken during the storm on our voyage from St. Michael's to St. Lawrence Bay. A ** black bulb in air" (maximum) we have not. Permit me to express some surprise that the occupant of the position of meteorologist on this expedition does not come under the operation of your strict rule of "official courtesy," a respect for which, i-n all transactions, you requested with so much emphasis a little while ago. The con- temptuous disregard for my personal feelings as a member of the expedition, exhibited in several ways and from time to time, by yourself and your fellow officers, I can well afford to pass as unworthy of notice ; but in my capacity as an employ^ of Mr. Bennett, and a r ecognized entity in the official personnel of the expedition by the honorable Secretary of the Navy, I regard every act of discourtesy, official and per- sonal, as an infringement on my rights, expressed or implied by the fact of my ap- pointment. As a new year of work is about to be^^in for me, it is of vital importance in many ways that I should understand the position I am to occupy in relation to that work, to you and to the other gentlemen associated with you. I have been aware Mr. Abnoux (interposing). Is that letter addressed to anybody, or does it purport to have been delivered to anybody? Mr. Collins. It was found on the body. Mr. Arnoux. It has not appeared that any one ever had any cogni- zance of that letter. Mr. Collins. That, I have np knowledge of. I suppose I had better read the letter right through. From the commencement of the standing yon were willing to accord any civilian appointed to take part in the scientific work of the expedition as a **mere accessory," to use the expression you employed to the reporter of the Washington Post, in April, 1879, when interviewed by him. This was the way in which you endeavored to give force to the statement that all scientific work required would be done by the officers of the navy. Mr. Bennett, when asked about this, said you luust have been misre- ported. Mr. Connery remarked with some indignation, that you never used such lan- guage. On these assurances from the gentlemen who knew yon, as they bly to that ? Mr. Collins. I replied to that and came on to Washington. Mr. Arnoux. Allow me to say that Mrs. De Long never received any notification at all. Mr. Collins. I was introduced to Master S. C. Lemly, the judge- advocate of the court, by the Judge-Advocate-General of the !Ravy ; Colonel Eemey, I think, was his name. I met him in the Judge- Advo- cate's room in the Navy Department. The Judge- Advocate-General in a general conversation stated to me that it would do no good to bring- up the De Long-Collins matter ; that in the charge of the Sfavy Depart- ment were certain papers iuDe Long's writing bringing grave and serious charges against Collins, and that it was better for all parties to let the matter rest, and that it was also the wish of the Secretary of the Navy, Mr. Chandler, tbat the matter should not be gone into. I made a memo- randum of the conversation immediately after. On my refusing to let the matter rest, on my statement to the Judge- Advocate- General that I proposed to place, if possible, before the court any information I had, he said *'In that case, Captain De Long's charges against your brother will have to go in also and have to be made public." I told him that the ^i^bry pd^^^se for which I came on to Washington was to get these charges made public. Fe said in reply to that that I was making a very great mistake, and that i Tould onl^ injure my brother's memory. Immediately after the conversation c;osed Master Lemly came in, and I was introduced to him. We visited tha room in which the court was held. He was looking for some papers, and he stated to me that he wanted to talk with me in relation to the matt(^~^s on either side. I stated to him that I wished positively that the chirges made by Captain De Long against Mr. Collins should be made piblic. He said that that was what he wanted specially to see me in Was.iington about, as the Secretary of the Navy had in his possession certain papers containing charges by Lieutenant De Long against my brol;her, and it was the wish of the 2jq* i 18 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Secretary of the Kavy to let the matter drop if I would consent and not to have my brother's papers or trouble go before the' court. Master Lemly said that if my brother's case was oi:>ened up the De Long charges would be made public. I said that it was for that special object I came to Washington, repeating what I had said to Colonel Eemey, and that I did not want any compromise in the matter. After a general conversation, Master Lemly gave me the package purporting to contain all the papers and effects found on my brother's body, and we examined them together. I saw Master Lemly several times and furnished him a list of questions I desired that he should ask the survivors upon the part of my brother. Master Lemly took the questions and promised to do so, saying, "You will please remember this : that I shall ask the ques- tions, but at the same time object to any being answered that will in any way tend to reflect discredit on anj^ of the dead men." I stated to Master Lemly that what I wanted was the truth, and that I was going to have the truth, dead men or living men. Master Lemly then replied that I should not expect too much of the court of inquiry, and that I should remember that it was a naval court, and that everything would be viewed from a naval stand-point and through naval spectacles ; that no matter how strong my evidence or my case was I should remember that. Master Lemly after pointing out several questions that he would not put and informing me that he would not put questions that reflected on anybodj^, and that he would allow what he called no hearsay testi- mony, told me it would be better for me to be represented by counsel. Mr. BouTELLE (interposing). Allow me. Mr. Chairman, you are bet- ter versed in legal practice than I ; is it customary for a witness to make statements in regard to the official action of another person without allowing that other person to be present and hear the testimony ? The Chairman. This is only preliminary. Mr. Curtis. When Dr. Collins goes on the stand we shall send a notice to those gentlemen. Mr. Collins. Master Lemly requested me to be represented by coun- sel, and I told him that it was utterly useless for me to employ counsel if the court would not admit and if he would object to every point that seemed to bring out the story. I left the paper containing the questions in Master Lemly's possession, and in a day or so afterwards left Wash- ington. While in Washington, at the Riggs House, Master Lemly ad- vised me not to go to the court, saying probably it would be better for me not to go up there unless I was sent for. I said, "All right." Mas- ter Lemly kept his word in relation to objecting to the questions, for an examination of the record of the court of inquiry will clearly show that nearly every question asked that would in any way throw light upon the subject was ruled out. Mr. Curtis. It was objected to by himself? Mr. Collins. Either objected to by the judge-ad r£>^ate of the -fourt or ruled out by the court, the majority of hVj questions being objected to by the judge-advocate of the coKv^j^and the objection being sustained. I would state, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, that every charge that I have made, either publicly or in my memqrial to Congress, and every statement that I have made and '\ ill make before this committee, has been based solely and entirely oa statements either made directly to me by the survivors or made by he survivors to other parties, who have informed me, or made to me b.^ parties who have had a kno wedge of the expedition. Mr. ISTewcomb, ^he naturalist of the expedition, in de- tail explained to me my brother's position and treatment on shipboard. He also went into detail and ex:)lained to me his treatment both on the JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 19 ship during the retreat and during the stay In Geeomovialocke, and also coming home. I hold in my hand here and will read for the inl'oraiation of the committee a letter sent by one of the survivors, in reply to the simple question, '' Do you or do you not believe that the court of inquiry of the Kaval Department has covered all the facts in this case, and all the truth has been known that coukl possibly be known about the ex- pedition T' It is dated February 15, 1884: Sir: Iu answer to your inquiry, I for one deena it absolutely necessary that an in- vestigation be made by Congress into the Jeannette expedition, iu order to do justice to the living and to the dead. Yours, truly, J. H. BARTLETT. Mr. BouTELLE. Who is that ! Mr. Collins. One of the survivors. Mr. Bartlett has explained to me the reasons why a good many of these statements on the stand were made. Mr. BouTELLE. Qualifying statements ? Mr. Collins. Yes, sir. In the first place, that he was the last witness examined and that previous witnesses had made certain statements and that he could only answer in a general way 5 in the second i^lace, that he was under the jurisdiction and control of the Navy Department. I have avoided as much as possible during the whole affair making any statement of what the survivors told me. Mr. BouTELLE. Did he state to you that his testimony was not cor- rect ? Mr. Collins. Yes, sir; that it was not full. I have preferred to let the parties themselves who know these facts tell them. But I will also state that a good deal of the information I have obtained has come from John P. Jackson, of the New York Herald, statements to others, and as he was in communication with a great many of the survivors, he has their statement. He is in a position to know the facts of the case. No one can regret the necessity for this investigation more than I, and no one can more fully symiDathize Avith the losses sustained by the relatives of the people who died on the expedition more than I. But I have had a threefold purpose in trying to secure this investigation, and one is that my brother, starting out on the expedition as a representative 01 the New York Herald to do a certain work, and, according to the testi- mony of the survivors, was not permitted to do that ; received such treat- ment on the ship, being relieved from duty, allowed to take no part in the retreat or anything else in tbe work of the retreat, and dying at last a prisoner on the banks of the Lena, starved to death. Justice to his memory demands first of all that this matter should be cleared up and that all the facts relative to the expedition should be known. I think that the true history of this expedition should also be before the world, and not the garbled, artificially-prepared account that has been pub- lished as containing the facts, and that also in the future when other expeditions start to the north pole, those people who go on them might learn a grave and serious lesson from the results of this expedition, and be on their guard against placing themselves in positions that once they leave civihzation it will be impossible to get out of them, and which are beyond their control to control or get relief from. Mr. BouTELLE. I would like to ask if Mr. Collins will indicate what facts it is proposed to establish which are not brought out in this record of the Court of Inquiry — what the general object and scoi)e of our inves- tigation is to be. Mr. Curtis. I think I could answer that question as I answered it 20 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. before in reply to Judge Arnoux, that there is nothing that he has gone over in his opening of any importance that is embodied in this record of the Court of Inquiry, and the reason is i)atent, in his own language, that while tlie Judge- Advocate-General gave him his promise to put the questions, in many instances after putting the questions objected to them, and they were ruled out, and when they were not ruled out at his suggestion, or on his objection, they were ruled out by the court. You will, see if j^ou examine this book, so far as my present recollection serves me of this opening, that none of the matters that he has covered in that opening were gone into in this investigation before the Board of Inquiry, or even if it was hinted, it was done in such a way that it was subject to objection and was ruled out. Mr. BouTELLE. If I understand the counsel — we are getting down to a i)oint — the object of the investigation is to be primarily to deter- mine the treatment of Mr. Collins upon the expedition j the relations existing between Mr, Collins and Captain De Long. Mr. Curtis. The object is embodied in the resolution. Mr. BoUTELLE. No ; but I mean the object which you have under the resolution. Let me make myself plain, if I can. The House of Eepre- sentatives has authorized this committee to investigate this matter. Now, as I understand it, any gentleman in the United States who has, or who deems he has, matters of interest to bring to the attention of this committee, or who can suggest any line of investigation that would be profitable or advisable is empowered under that resolution to come here and suggest it. I understand that Dr. Collins has come here for thut purpose, very properly, as the gentleman who was the suggestor of the resolution. Now, he undoubtedly has a certain line of investiga- tion which he desires to pursue. I am not sure but Mrs. De Long, or Mr. Melville, or Mr. Danenhower, or others, may have some other lines which they desire to pursue, and my question is simply whether Dr. ColHns or his counsel would indicate in a general way the scope of the investigation which they desire, so that we may add that to the sugges- tions made by others, and find out in the aggregate what it is desired to do. Mr. Curtis. We have no objection to that, sir, and we thank you for the suggestion. Now, the resolution is a vevy brief one : Whereas, a petition has been presented to the honorable Speaker of the House of Reproscntalivcs, respectfully representing the condition of the Jeanuette Arctic expe- dition, ai'd the conduct of tlie surviving members, and the manner of the investiga- tion adopted by the naval court under the joint resolution providing for the same; and inasmuch as said facts involve the honor and humanity of officers in the United States service, as well as a proper respect for those who perished in the expedition ; and inasmuch as the naval Court of Inquiry refused to admit or allow, as it is alleged,' valualdc testimony to be given to bring out the facts of the case in the interest of truth aud liistory : Therefore, Beit resolved, That the Committee on Naval Affairs of this House be directed to in- vestigate the facts connected with said expedition, and the alleged unofficer-like and inhuman conduct therein, aud that said committee be authorized to send for persons and papers, and to employ a stenographer. Now, the resolution embodies our purpose. But we are willing to state specifically, personally, outside of the duty that Dr. Collins owes to his brother who perished, he has a duty to perform in the lan- guage of this resolution to truth and history, and his duty to truth and history comi)els him to prove, if he can, facts which establish the inhuman treatment of his brother, while on that expedition, by ofiicers in the naval service of the United States, and to prove, if he can, that the want of success of the expedition was attributable in great measure to misgovernment and mismanagement j and the further object JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 21 he has in view is, if he can establish it "by proof, to show that what his- tory has been written on this subject, in relation to the causes of its fail- ure is erroneous. That is the object. Now, we submit that.this is a matter of no ordinary interest. It is one in which the United States Govern- ment, stimulated by private enterprise, undertook an expedition in the interests of science. Humanity, science, the history of the future, are all involved in the history of this expedition. Mr. BouTELLE. Yes, but the counsel seems to ignore the fact that this matter has been yev-j exhaustively gone over once by a competent board. ]Srow, this committee is further to examine into the work of that board, and will be very glad to do so. But it seems to me that you ought to indicate in some way what we are to take hold of. According to your remarks you seem to indicate that we shall begin dc novo and investigate the whole subject. Mr. Curtis. Ko, sir ; not by any means. As we proceed you will discover that all matters contained in this record that are foreign to the purposes of this resolution will not be considered by us either in argu- ment or in the proof. The general position we take here — differing, in great respect, from the member of the committee who has expressed his opinion — is not that this was a fair Board of Inquiry. Mr. BouTELLE. If the gentleman will allow me, I do not undertake as a member of a House committee to express an opinion as to whether the Court of Inquiry was fair or unfair. I said it was a competent board. Mr. Curtis. Then I submit, with great respect, that for the purposes of the investigation it was shown that the spirit of that investigation was hostile to the spirit of this resolution. It was unfair, and there- fore in law it is incomi)etent to be plead here as res adjudicata agaiust us. It is from that Board of Inquiry that we appeal to the conscience of the country, and it is before this committee, representing that con- science of the country, that we desire to lay the evidence that was ex- cluded there. Of course, you can have very little idea of the vast amount of proof that might have been put in from the number of ques- tions asked and excluded. Those might have been very few, but, if they had been admitted originally, the matter which sx)rung from them would have been of interest and importance. We do not want to take up your time unnecessarily. Mr. BouTELLE. My object was simply to get some statement of the object and scope of the inquiry. Mr. Curtis. We don't pretend to travel like a pedestrian in a six days' journey over a beaten path. W^e simply want to draw the atten- tion of the committee to those inquiries that the Board of Inquiry ex- cluded us from entering into. Mr. BouTELLE. That is exactly what I supposed. Mr. Arnoux. I would like to suggest that the last of the grounds of the new avenues they propose to travel is not germane to this inquiry. I think the others may be. He says certain things have been published which are inaccurate. I do not suppose that you are going to sit upon that. I have heard and I have no doubt that others have heard with great delight the lecture of Lieutenant Danenhower wherein he graph- ically described the dangers aud the perils through which the Jeannette party passed from the time of their leaving the vessel and until they reached civilization. Kow, I do not suppose it is within the purview of this committee that Lieutenant Danenhower was correct in everything he has stated. Mr. Curtis. I do not contend that. The trouble with counsel is that he is continually leveling lances at windmills. 22 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Mr. Arnoux. You said something about that — you would prove in- accurate publications. Mr. Curtis. Not by asking this committee to review those inaccurate publications. The Chairman. My opinion is that the power of this committee is to review and ascertain the true facts from beginning to eiul. That reso- lution covers all, and it is impossible to tell beforehand what is legiti- mate evidence and what is not. Those questions can be determined as they come up, and I do not think Mr. Collins himself knows the full scope of the investigation until the witnesses are examined. Mr. BouTELLE. Suppose we proceed and act upon the questions as they arise? The Chairman. Very well. That is the only way it can be done. James H. Bartlett sworn and examined. By Mr. Curtis : Question. Where do you reside at the present time? — Answer. In Dunkirk, State of New York. Q. What is your profession ? — A. Machinist. Q. You were attached to the Jeannette expedition ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. In what capacity, if you please ? — A. In the capacity of a first- class fireman, acting as assistant engineer ; that is, I fulfilled the duties of that office. Q. Between the time of your departure on that expedition and your rescue of the other survivors, how much time elapsed ? — A. Well, we left San Francisco the 8th of July, 1879. When we found the remains of De Long's people, I think it was the 24th of March. As to th3 date, I won't be positive now, because I have not looked it up lately. I think it was the 24th of March, 1882, or about that time. Q. The object of. my question was to ascertain Avhat time elapsed be- tween your departure and your rescue of the other survivors. The Witness. Of all of them, do vou mean ? Mr. Curtis. Yes.— A. It was from July 8, 1879, until the 27th of March, 1883, that the last survivors returned to America, and we were not rescued until we returned here, as I understand it. Q. You were attached to the naval service of the United States at that time ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Had you ever voyaged with Captain De Long before ? — A. No, sir. Q. Of course you got to know him quite well on this expedition ? — A. Quite well; yes, sir. Q. You were also acquainted with Mr. Jerome J. Collins ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. In what capacity, so far as you know, did Mr. Collins serve on the Jeannette expedition ? Mr. Arnoux. Is not that a matter of record I Mr. Curtis. No; do you want to raise the point as to the seamen ? Mr. Arnoux. No; I only supposed it was a matter of record who were the men on board. Mr. Curtis. You can prove a physical fact; you can prove a man's capacity prima facte. Mr. Arnoux. I don't make any objection. Mr. Curtis. Very well. By Mr. Curtis : Question (resuming). In what capacity, so far as you know, did Mr. JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 23 Collins serve on tlie Jeannette expedition ? — A. He served, up to the time of his arrest, or withdrawal from duty, in the capacity of weather reporter. Q. You speak of the time of his arrest. When was he arrested? — A. I cannot give you the date at present. Mr. Curtis. Give it as near as you can. The Witness. Well, I think we had been out about a year then, or nearly a year. Q. And where was the ship located at that time? — A. It was located in the ice in the Arctic Ocean. Q. She sank about the spot at which she was jammed in the ice, did she not ^. — A. No, sir ; she drifted for several months in the ice ; drifted from the 6th of September, until the 11th of June, twenty-two months. Q. But still locked in the ice ? — A. But still locked in the ice. Q. How soon after his arrest did Mr. Collins return to duty, if you know ? — A. 'Not until the beginning of the retreat, after the loss of the ship. Q. When was that 1 — A. That was the 17th of June. Q. Of what year ^. — A. Two years ago. Q. Do you know by whose order he was placed under arrest ? — A. I was told by him Mr. Arnoux (interi^osing). No, not what he told you; that is not comx3etent. Mr. Curtis. I would like to raise that question before the committee. Mr. Arnoux. I submit that the declarations of Mr. Collins, in refer- ence to any grievances that he had, are not competent evidence. A man can never make by declarations, and repeated as hearsay evidence, any evidence in his own favor. It is only the declarations which are against interest which are admitted as declarations. It is not compe- tent for a witness to say that another man told him that a certain person struck him ; but it would be competent for the other person to declare, ''I struck that i^erson," to prove it by hearsay. Mr. Curtis. I will concede that if we were trying a will cause or any case in which the severe legal rule could be invoked, that my friend's po- sition, might be the correct one. Before this Board of Inquiry, which, in the language of one of the committee, is presumed to have been a com- petent Board, was admitted a memorandum signed by George W. De Long, lieutenant. United States Navy, commanding, to which was added another memorandum, in some respects inconsistent with the first, also signed by George W. I)e Long, w^ho, at the time of the admission of the memoranda, was confessedly dead. The committee will remember in the opening of Dr. Collins that he spoke of an interview with the Judge- Advocate-General, in which Mr. Kemy stated to him that there were grave charges on file in the Navy Department against Mr. Collins, on the part of Mr. De Long, and that it was better for him not to bring up the controversy as between them. There is nothing that justifies me in assuming that in the present state of proof these memoranda constituted the charges referred to; but if they do, the committee w^ill see how trivial they were, and on what a slight basis they rested, and by these memoranda, if his arrest and im- prisonment in any way were caused by the subject-matter set forth in them, then logically as well as legally the very arrest and imprisonment for such causes w^as barbarous and inhuman in the extreme; or they in- dicate that perhaps the mind of Mr. De Long had to an extent suc- cumbed under the influences of the climate, as, I am told, often happens to these adventurous navigators. Now, De Long's statement — upon the 24 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. theory and upon the promise and upon the concession on both sides that we are not going to traverse this record except so far as it applies to, is antagonistic to, or harmonious with the new evidence — these memoranda of De Long must be in the proof before you. Mr. Boi] TELLE. Which memorandum do you refer to? Mr. Curtis. On pages 320, 321, and 322. ' It is marked "Exhibit S. T." The pai)er, you will see, is headed " Arctic steamer Jeannette, beset and drifting in the pack." Now, what an injustice it seems to me would it be to permit these memoranda to remain in the record, as they must ever remain in the record, the memoranda of a dead person, and exclude the evidence of a living man who heard the statement of Mr. Collins in respect to his differences with Mr. De Long. I submit here with a good deal of confidence, that in this investigation wherein you are seeking to discover the truth and to do justice you are not con- fined to those strict rules of evidence that jirevail in the civil courts or the criminal tribunals, where living persons are litigants, one against another, or where the people are on one side and a respondent is on the other ', but in the necessity of the case you must receive evidence of this character as the best obtainable under the circumstances. For In- stance, to show the injustice of such a rule, I understand that the other side will contend, as 1 judge from somethings that occurred before the Board of Inquiry, that strictly, legally, technically, no matter what the understanding was with Mr. Bennett, of the Herald, no matter what were the circumstances under which this expedition was organized, Mr. Collins was entitled simply to the treatment of a common seaman. Well, now you will see how that error creeps in ; and, as this is a very important matter, I will take the liberty of presenting our view upon it briefly, because upon the decision of the committee in reference to this matter will depend a good deal of testimony. By a regulation of the United States Navy, notwithstanding the fact that this was an ex- pedition set on foot by private enterprise, Mr. Collins discovered that he could only be entered upon the books as a seaman. Mr. BouTELLE. That was under the act of Congress. Mr. Curtis. Yes, sir; you are right. It was according to an act of Congress. He could only be entered as a common seaman upon the books of the ship, not being connected with the naval service of the United States. But in an investigation of this character, in the wide scope given by the resolution of Congress, are the committee to be bound by strict technical rules of law, which undoubtedly might govern in another tribunal and under other circumstances? There can be no question that, although he was entered as a common seaman, he departed on that expedition in a special capacitj^ in the interest of science and to represent a scientific bureau of the journal with which he was connected. There will be no doubt about that. Mr. Boua ELLE. I would suggest that the way in which the investiga- tion started that we had not Mr. Collinses status placed before the com- mittee. Mr. Curtis. I am siraj^ly referring to this as an illustration of what I am about to say in reference to the objection made upon the other side, to show a parallel injustice in that case. Now, Mr. De Long's statement — if it was founded on fact, and he was in possession of the faculties that he was in possession of when he de- parted on that exj)edition — as contained in these memoranda shows, over his own handwriting, beyond any controversy, that the cause of the differences, so far as that expresses it, was entirely inadequate and puerile: much more inadequate when it was to result in a treatment not JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 25 contemplated by scientific men, when it was to result in the arrest and imprisonment of Mr. Collins. Mr. BouTELLE. What do you understand by " arrest and imprison- ment^'? Mr. Curtis. I take the terms as synonymous. I presume when he is put under arrest he is put under restraint. If he is put under re- straint he is imprisoned. He may not have been imprisoned within four walls, because he may have been on his parole. That has not yet been discovered. Mr. BouTELLE. I only asked the question because it is a matter of common occurrence for an officer to be put under arrest, which would be classed by you as trivial — that is the commonest method of applying restriction to an officer. Mr. Curtis. But, you see, we have to build this question up. What- ever the cause of difference might have been, whether well grounded or not, they existed, and they resulted in the physical fact, already tes- tified by Mr. Bartlett, of his arrest. It is immaterial to me whether that arrest was followed by actual x)hysical imprisonment or not. It certainly was the result of the application of the technical rule that governs technical relations between the seamen and the officer of the ship. Mr. BOUTELLE. Ko ; not necessarily. Permit me. Between a su- perior and an inferior. He has the same i)Ower to place under arrest any officer as he would a seaman. Mr. Curtis. Well, X admit your correction. On reflection, it is better than mine, and you know more about it than I do ; but what I contend is this : We have proved there was a difference. That is a physical fact. 'Now, Collins is not here to make his statement. You have on this record — because in our concession those portions of the record, if applied to the scope of this resolution, will be part of the record of your committee — memoranda from De Long, in which he makes charges against Collins. He is permitted to speak from the grave. Collins, if the theory of the learned counsel be true, is not to be permitted to speak; to show, either, from his own mouth, that there were causes for difference ; to show what those causes of difference were. jM'ow, I sub- mit, sir, this is an expedition that is, so far as the rules of law that govern this investigation are concerned, outside of the cold technicali- ties of the law. We are not in a court of law seeking damages. We are not making application for honors or pensions, but we are simply asking a committee of the House of Eepresentatives as intelligent men, as men of good common sense and judgment, to receive this statement of Collins, equally with the statement that was permitted to be made in the memoranda before a board of inquiry. It would be a palpable in- justice, it seems to me, to allow the memoranda of De Long to remain forever and forever on the record of this Court of Inquiry, and on the records of this House, and then not permit the statement of Collins in reference to this or to other differences to be received. How else can you get at the truth 'i The survivors, unless they saw physical acts, un- less they heard words, unless they were present when there were utter- ances, cannot testify any more than the dead men in their graves, and this singular inconsistency was exhibited before the Board of Inquiry. They ruled substantially that no testimony from the lips of the dead through another person could be received, neither could testimony from the lips of a living man be received through another persons, and in the same investigation and in the same inquiry they permit these memo- randa to go upon the record. 'No^Y, I submit that the strict rule of law 26 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. that governs in most of the States of this Union, a rule of law that was made for the protection of property, a rule of law that was made for the protection of the States, to prevent fraud and collusion and corrni)- tion after the death of the testator, is not to be applied here. It cannot be. Wonld you have any hesitation to believe an utterance of Collins or an utterance of De Long if repeated to you by a reputable person? Supposing, for instance, a person should tell you in reference to a man that you knew well that he had died at ii certain spot ; that he had said certain things ; that he had given certain messages to you, desiring him to carry them. Under ordinary circumstances you would have no doubt of that. You would not say let me reach down the statute book ; let me see what the statute law of the State or of the land says in regard to the testimony of persons in civil controversies or criminal prosecutions. Not at all. And, I submit, sir, as a question of parlia- mentary precedent, as a question so well settled that it has become parliamentary law, and more particularly in the trial of peers in Eng- land; and 1 believe, although I am not positive in that regard, the same principle was enunciated in the trial ot Queen Caroline, that certain statements made by dead persons, transmitted through other disinterested persons, were received. This strict rule of law for which the gentleman contends is not to be applied here, I respectfully submit. Here was a man who was with Collins on the same expedition. He knew of the fact of his arrest, knew of the fact that there must have been some difference. De Long's statement looks out at us from the record, and we are denied the privilege of giving Collins' statement in regard to the same matter. I submit it is unjust. Mr. Arnoitx. I submit that in this record were admitted the writings of Mr. Collins in precisely the same way that the writings of Mr. De Long were admitted, and the committee will find them on page 318, Exhibit Q. K. That letter is at length what Mr. Collins wrote. The counsel has traveled over two very distinct and difterent points and 1 would like to answer both of them. He refers to the report which Ca])tain De Long made to the Navy Department, and memoranda con- nected with it as to the difference between, as he considers it, Mr. Col- lins and Captain De Long. Now 1 say that the regulation there referred to, that the men should take ext-rcise, was one ot the wisest and most beneficial rules that could be made on board a vessel in the Arctic re- gions ; that it was shown that Mr. Collins deliberately disobeyed it. It was an act of gross insubordination, and when he was spoken to by his superior officer, he answered in a way for which he deserved to be court- martialed if he had been an officer of the vessel. I say that taking that record there, instead of its being a trivial matter, it was as gross insubor- dination as any man could be guilty of in the discipline of the Navy. But that has nothing to do with the question which is now before you, and it is this: This gentleman now on the witness stand is one of a number of survivors, every one of whom was in precisely the same position, so far as proximity to the parties was concerned, as the witness. He knew notiiing about the transaction — I mean as a matter of fact. All that he knows about it is by hearsay. Now it is ])roposed that the party who is placed under arrest, and which this Naval Committee understands so fully tliat it is not necessary to si)eak of it — a member of that ship's com[)any is placed under arrest, and it is proposed that the arrested man shall tell somebody else what was the ground, or what he had to say in defense of his conduct, and that tliat somebody else can come here and testify to it, and so make a fact before the committee. Now JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 27 I submit that it uever was permitted, and never can be permitted, in any court of inquiry, or in any court of any kind. The counsel has alluded to the proceedings in the House of Peers as a court. There is only one exception which they ever admitted, and that is admitted in every court in the world, and that is in regard to pedigree. From the very nature of the case the only way that you can establish a person's pedigree is by hearsay testimony, when you go far enough back, and therefore it is x)ermitted. But even in such cases the testi- mony is not admitted after the controversy has arisen. Now the coun- sel chooses to treat this as a controversy. I say it Avas none at all. Here was the commanding officer enforcing the discipline on shipboard. That does not make any controversy between him and anybody else on board. But giving him all that he claims for it, if it made a contro- versy the evidence subsequent to that time is not admissible, and it is the only instance that I ever heard of that hearsay evidence can be ever introduced in a person's favor. Mr. Curtis. The weakness of the gentleman's argument is this : He says that we are trying to make a fact by hearsay evidence, and goes on in the next breath and treats as a record a memorandum of charges which were never tried, and assumes that they were true, thus illustrat- ing more powerfully than I could have done, the very position that I assumed. Now there are cases and cases, and they have not been infrequent in the last one hundred and fifty or two hundred years, where hearsay evidence has been taken, not in case of pedigree. 1 am willing to leave that question to the chairman. But what I say is this: It is apparent that the other side, like who ever had charge of the proceedings in the Court of Inquiry, are endeavoring to take from the legitimate proof in this investigation that which is vital and important to us, and override the very rules they themselves make, wben applied to us, and introducing matter in the very same illegitimate manner, as they contend, vital and imx^ortant to themselves. Now, that is the posi- tion. Here is a memorandum of charges which the learned counsel says assumes the dignity of a fact on this record — a memorandum of cliarges that were never tried — a memorandum of charges found on the body of a dead person, and we are not permitted, by still better evidence than that of a disinterested i)erson in an investigation of this character to prove our side of the case. Mr. BouTELLE. The question at issue between the counsel seems to be simply whether the investigation shall be conducted according to the strict legal rules of evidence. As one member of the committee not of the legal profession, I should be very willing, and rather prefer, to have the investigation conducted according to what the gentleman terms the rules of common sense, because -I understand them better than I do the rules of legal evidence. But it seems to me if these parties are to be represented by counsel, that the only possible object of having counsel here is to interpret and guard the application of the rules of evidence, and if we are not going to be governed by the legal rules, we had better take the witnesses in hand and run them ourselves. Thus far we have had two-thirds counsel to one-third witness. Now, my friend, the chairman, will rule upon this point, because he is the judge. The Chairman. The rule laid down by Mr. Arnoux is the general rule of evidence. But there is some exception to that. The saying of a party to an act or to certain circumstances and situations in which he may be placed and found, explanatory of that act, or those circumstances 28 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. • or situations, are admissible in evidence and termed a part of the res gesice as explanatory of the act. Mr. Arnoux. But those are not declarations made subsequently. The Chairman. The sayings of the party while in the performance of the act ! Mr. Arnoux. Yes. The Chairman. As if he is about leaving Washington he says he is going to New York, and he is going on a certain matter of business. Those declarations made explanatory of his act are admissible. Now, if Mr. Jerome J. Collins was suspended from his duties, and Mr. Bartlett found him so suspended, and he entered into an explanation of his sus- pension, explaining why and how, and the mode and manner in which it was done, my own opinion is that that is admissible as part of the res gestw of his acts and condition at that time. Mr. Arnoux. But that would not be months after the act of suspen- sion, would it ? The Chairman. No, sir ; it does not appear how long that was. The question was, if he knew about his arrest. Mr. Arnoux. He asked if he had made any statement to him about it. Mr. Curtis. I withdraw that question. Mr. Arnoux. Yery well. By Mr. Curtis : Q. At the time when he was under arrest did he make any statement to you in reference to the arrest and its causes? — A. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Did I understand the witness to say that he was un- der arrest ? The Witness. Arrest or suspension from duty. By Mr. Curtis : Q. As a fact you knew that he was arrested or suspended from duty ? — A- Yes, sir ; that he was either arrested or suspended, or both. Q. You knew that as a fact ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, at the time of his arrest or suspension, or both, did he make any statement to you of its causes ? — A. Yes, sir. Mr. Curtis. Tell us what they were. Mr. Arnoux. One moment. Let me ask a question before that. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. How soon after he was arrested or suspended, or both, was it that he made that statement? Mr. Curtis. I object to that if it was made during his arrest or sus- pension, because the act continued, in the language of the chairman. The Chairman. It would do no harm. A. I think it was the night after the occurrence. By Mr. Curtis : Q. As a matter of fact, was he arrested or suspended! — A. Well, I did not see any positive arrest or suspension made, but he was taken from duty. That was evident. I coukl see that very i)laiidy. Q. You saw that with your eyes; it was a physical fact? — A. Certainly, it was a physical fiict that he was taken from duty. Q. You know that he was suspended from duty ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, at the time of liis suspension, before his suspension had terminated or ended, did he make any statement to you of its cause ? — A. Yes, sir ; he spoke to me several times Q. Now, what did he say? JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 29 Mr. Arnoux. Now, I object to any of the subsequent times after that first night. Mr. Curtis (to witness). Well, take the first time; we'll take that first. The Witness. I do not understand the question exactly now. What was it ? By Mr. Curtis : Q. At the time of his suspension, during the time of his suspension did he make any statement to you relative to its causes 1 — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, what was it"? Mr. Arnoux. That is in the first conversation. Mr. Curtis. Well, of course he cannot give the first last. There is a beginning of all things, even in nature. Mr. Arnoux. I want him to confine himself to the first. — A. He said to me that he and De Long had had several differences in relation to his position and the nse of scientific instruments on board the ship ; that the scientific instruments had been placed in his charge by De Long at the time of leaving San Francisco, or at the time he joined the expedi- tion, and that De Long had gradually taken his instruments from him ; had left him very few in his position ; had told him several times that he did not know the use of his instruments, and had finally placed him in certain positions and under certain restrictions in regard to open air exercise that made it very unpleasant and uncomfortable for him, and almost unendurable to him ; that he had been living a perfect '^ hell on earth," and as he had to take his duty on watch, as they call it, aboard ship at 12 noon — make an observation at 12 o'clock and remain on watch until 3 o'clock the next morning — that he thought he had sufficient open air exercise without being called to have his breakfast in time to go on the ice at 11 o'clock, as he had to be out at 12, and remain out until 3; and he said he had told De Long that he did not propose to be watched and dogged as though he was a poor man's cur. Q. I believe you stated that he went out as the scientific officer of the ship, or connected with the scientific department ? — A. That I stated from hearsay. Mr. Arnoux. He said as weather reporter. The Witness. As weather reporter. By Mr. Curtis : Q. In that conversation, do you remember whether he said anything about going down in the engine-room to warm himself, or to get a dish of hot tea, or anything of that nature, and that DeLong would not permit him. Mr. Arnoux. Is that a part of that first conversation*?-^ A. Yes, sir; he told me that he was in the habit of coming into the fire-room where the distiller for distilling fresh water was run, during the night, to have a cup of tea made, generally at 3 o'clock, after he had made his last morning observation ; and he told me that he had even been denied that ; that De Long had told him that it was not within the dignity of an officer to associate too freely with the men. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. Not within the dignity of an officer ! — A. Those are the words he used, ^'That it was not within the dignity of an officer to associate too freely with the men, and that if he wanted fresh water he could get it from Mr. Melville." 30 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. By Mr. Curtis : Q. He referred bim to Mr. Melville 1 — A. That was the statement that Collius made to me. Q. At that time did he say anything' about his treatment on board, before the time of arrest? — A. AVell, only as I stated, that he had lived a perfect hell on earth. By Mr. Arnoux: Q. Did he say that before his arrest? — A. No, sir. Mr. Curtis. I did not ask him that; but did he at that conversation which he has given say anything about his (Collins's) treatment before his (Collins's) arrest on board ? He did not say anything that you antic- ipated. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Is that all that you remember on that subject ? — A. Well, at that particular time, yes. Q. Do not go beyond the time that he was liberated. During the time that his suspension lasted did you have other conversations with him ?^ A. Oh, yes. Q. And on the same topic? — A. Oh, yes. Q. And what did he say? Mr. Arnoux. 1 object to those later conversations. That would be like a man in a hospital from an accident, saying after he had been there six months that he was shot by somebody; his declarations during the time that he was in the hospital would not be partof the res gestcv; they may be on the day he was carried there or the day after, but not six mouths after. Mr. Curtis. Would it be any less true? Mr. Arnoux. The declarations would not be receivable as partof the res gestce; it has been so held distinctl3^ Mr. CuR'J IS. They would be in reference to the wound which he had had for six months. The Chairman. Strictly this is not admissible unless he was speak- ing about his then i)reseut treatment. Mr. Arnoux. But that would have nothing to do with the matter of arrest, and therefore it would not be part of that declaration, and it w^ould ba the same as if there had been no arrest. Mr. Curtis. I am trying to show that he was talking to this gentle- man as his friend about this continued ill-treatment and about this sus- pension. It was not a suspension of a day or a week; it was a length- ened suspension in which all of these indignities continued. Mr. Arnoux. Then if it was a lengthened suspension it is precisely the same as if there was no suspension. Mr. Curtis. I do not know of any razor that will cut that hair. Mr. Arnoux. Here was a suspension. You have allowed statements made at the time as characteristic of the suspension. You did not allow him to state if he had heard him say anything about his treat- ment on board the boat. The arrest, the depriving him of his duty, had nothing whatever to do with the subsequent things, and, as I under- stand, the connnittee has ruled that any complaints that Mr. Collins might have made to anybody are admissible in evidence here. Mr. Curtis. The arrest was simply the connecting link between the maltreatment before and after. It is one continuous act of ill-treat- ment. To use the languilge of the witness, he lived in a hell on earth. The Chairman. Now, if there were any acts of ill-treatment after the JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 31 arrest, at any time subsequent, continuous acts, his declarations rela- tive to that treatment and accomi)anYini^- the treatment itself would be admissible. If he knows of any acts of ill treatment himself, he can specify those as facts, and then the declarations of Collins accompany- ing that treatment, cotemi)oraneous with the treatment, are all admis- sible. Mr. Curtis. That is exactly what I am trying to get at and I think my question shows it. Mr. Arnoux. We both understand the rule of law the same way, but we both misunderstand the question. Mr. Curtis. I don't j it is you. There will be no mistake about this question. By Mr. Curtis : Q. After the suspension, during that suspension, and before that sus- pension ended, did he say anything to you of a continuous ill treat- ment? Mr. Arnoux. I object to that question. It is only admissible if he knows of any ill treatment subsequent to that arrest, and then he can state whether there were ruj co-temporaneous declarations. The Chairman. He can state what his treatment was as far as it came within his knowledge, and then what Collins said. Mr. Curtis. Exactly. By Mr. Curtis : Q. (Resuming.) You saw that the act of suspension continued, did you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now I v/ill put the question to you once more. After the arrest or the susx)ension, during the suspension and before it ended, did he say anything to you about his continuous ill-treatment ! Mr. Arnoux. Now, I object to that. I say this is the question : After that arrest, did you know of any other act being done to Mr. Collins ? Mr. Curtis. I wish the committee to rule on that question of mine. Mr. Boutelle. I understand you use the terms ''arrest" and "ill- treatment" as synonymous '? Mr. Arnoux. He says continuous. Mr. Curtis. I put the question just as the chairman dictated, and just as the gentleman dictated it before I put it. The Chairman. Not quite. Now, if you will ask Mr. Bartlett if he knows of any insults or mistreatment after his arrest or suspension, whichever it might be, or both — he says it might be one, it might be both — of any indignity, insults, or ill-treatment subsequent to that time and he has knowledge of it himself, then he may give any statements Mr. Collins made explanatory of that. Mr. Curtis. Supj^ose he was not by when that act of ill-treatment was committed and he was told of it during this continuous suspension, which we shall claim was an act of indignity ; supposing these acts were committed when he was at a distance during the continuance of this suspension, would not the complaints Collins had poured into his ear about it be competent "? The Chairman. If they had connection with the suspension. Mr. Curtis. Exactly ; because the suspension was continuing. By Mr. Curtis : ^, I ask you did he during the time the suspension continued you of any ill-treatments 32 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Mr. Arnoux. Now, I object to that, for that is enabling him to make ill-treatment as a fact on the man's statement of it. Now he has told one fact, that the man was suspended or something of that kind. That is a fact within his knowledge. Now, is there any other fact within his knowledge *? Let us see whether there is. May I put that question ? Is there any other fact of ill-treatment within your knowledge ? The Chairman. 1 think it would be well enough to hear what he says, and then we can tell whether there was any other act of ill-treat- ment or not Avithout writing it down. (The stenographer was directed to suspend taking notes, in order that the committee might ascertain whether the testimony was proper to go on the record, after which the proceeding was resumed as follows :) By Mr. Curtis : Q. Between the act of suspension and the second act that you spoke of, in which he told Collins that he would not allow him to touch a rope, &c., did he make complaints to you of continuous ill-treatment ? — A. Yes, sir; several times. Q. Now, be kind enough to tell us what you saw and heard in refer- ence to the second act ; that is, wherein he told him not to touch a rope, &c. ? — A. Mr. Collins had been permitted, without being ordered not to do so, from the time we commenced to retreat up until about the 1st of July, I think, to work in one of the teams with the men. We worked in teams harnessed like dog teams. We were crossing a crack in the ice that was probably 15 or HO feet wide and had a smaller piece jammed in the crack that had to be held in position by a rope tied to it. Mr. (Jollins was holding this piece of ice while we were getting the sledge across. De Long came up and says : " Mr. Collins, give that rope to one of the men." Mr. Collins did not instantly obey; he still hung to the rope. De Long turned to him again, and says, "Mr. Collins, give that rope to Dressier," naming Dressier, who was near by, and says, " Damn you, don't you let me see you put your hand to another thing unti I order you." Q. Now, permit me to ask you, before the time that Mr. DeLong used the language that you have spoken of, had Mr. Collins used any insult- ing expression to him "? — A. Not that I ever heard. Q. And at this very time Mr. Collins was endeavoring to make him- self useful to the others in the expedition, to aid in their extrication? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And he was trying literally, as you say, to harness himself up like a dog to draw a sledge with the men 1 — A. Yes, sir. Mr. BouTELLE. He was a member of the team ? Mr. Curtis. Yes ; but he says he would not allow him to be harnessed to the team, the poor privilege of an Esquimau dog. By the Chairman : Q. I understood you to say he did work in the team "? — A. He did for about two weeks. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. What did he do after that ! — A. Simply got himself along, walked along. Q. He was relieved from working in the team ! — A. Yes, sir. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Now, Mr. Bartlett, so as to fix the date as nearly as you can rer JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 33 oUect, when was it that that last incident occurred '? — A. I think it was about the 1st of July. Q. In what year '? — A. 1881. Q. And have you any knowledge as to the exact time, or thereabouts, when Mr. Collins perished ! — A. Nothing, only what I got from De Long's journal. Q. How soon after did you hear of his death '? The Witness. After this ^ Mr. Curtis. Yes. A. Ifc was a year and a half nearly ; I will retract that, if I am al- lowed. This was about the 1st of July, and it was in March of the next year that I knew of his death. Q. Now, at the time of the occurrence of this last incident had the ship's crew separated ? — A. ISTo, sir. Q. You were all together ? — A. All together. Q. Will you be kind enough to tell me, if your memory serves you, if you had lost any men at that time 1 — A. No, sir. Q. Your original crew consisted of thirty-two men, did it not?— A. Thirty-three. Q. And at the time of the occurrence of the last incident, you were all together? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And where were you! — A. Well, God knows, I don't; we were in the ice in the Arctic Ocean. Q. That is a fact you did not learn from De Long's journal ?— A. No, sir. Q. You were in the Arctic Ocean ! — A. Y^es, sir. Q. I suppose you were on a drift ? — A. Yes, drifting ice. Q. How soon after that did you see Collins for the last time ? — A. Well, I saw him right after. Q. How long after did you see him for the last time f — A. I saw him the 12th of September. Q. Of what year ? — A. The same year. Q. And where was he then ? — A. He was in De Long's boat, the first cutter. Q. Now, between the time of the last incident to which you have tes- tified and the time when you last saw Collins was he restored to duty ? — A. Not to my knowledge. Q. Then from the time when you witnessed this last incident up to the time when you separated from him forever he was not restored to duty ? — A. No, sir ; not to m}^ knowledge. Q. And so far as you know the same sentiment and feeling existed between him and De Long as before ? — A. Yes, sir. Q, Between the time of the second incident and the time when you last separated from him did you yourself witness any other act or hear any other conversation between De Long and Collins ? — A. No, sir ; I did not. Q. He was left to go on by himself, was he ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Isolated from the rest? — A. No, sir; permitted to walk along as we were advancing with the sleighs. Q. Was he not ordered to the rear ? — A. Not that I know of. Q. Now, at the time of the last incident you were all together. When did 3^ou separate?— A. On the 12th of September. Q. And did you know where you were ? — A. Well, comparatively, by chart knowledge. We were between sixty and seventy miles northeast of the mouth of the Lena Eiver. 3 J Q* 34 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. To the northeast of the Lena Kiver ; that would be what we call the New Siberian Islands '? — A. No, sir ; it was the Simonoski Island. Q. Where were the Lena Islands ? — A. The^^ were to the northeast. Q. I say they were to the northeast of the Lena Eiver ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, when you separated, you separated into three i^arties? — A. Yes, sir. Q. One was commanded by De Long! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, who went with De Long'? — A. Mr. Nindemann, Dr. Ambler, Mr. Collins, Ericsson, Gortz, Iverson, Kaak Q. (Interposing.) About how many! — A. There were fourteen in his 1)3 rty, sir. Q. In one boat ! — A. Yes ; in one boat. Q. Who had the other two boats ? — A. Lieutenant Chipp had the second cutter. Q. And with him were how many men ! — A. Eight people. Q. None of them were ever found f — A. No, sir. Q. And in the third boat was Mr. Melville 1 — A. Yes, sir. Q. Can you name the persons who were with him 1 — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who were they ! — A. There was Mr. Danenhower, Leach, Wilson, Mansen, Charles Tong Sing, Aniguin, Newcomb, Cole, and Lauterbach. Q. You were with Melville, were you not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. From that moment you never saw Collins ! — A. Not till I saw him dead. Q. And you never saw Chipp '? — A. No, sir. Q. None of that boat's crew was ever found ! — A. No, sir. Q. W^herewas Collins found? — A. In the Lena delta, on the bank of the river. Q. And by whom ? — A. lie was immediately discovered by Mr. Mel- ville and Mr. Nindemann. I believe they were the people who found him. Q. Do you remember when it was you found the t)ody of Mr. Collins f — A. It was in March. Q. Of what year ?— A. 1882. Q. Did you find any persons with him 1 — A . Yes, sir. Q. Whom did you find ! — A. We found Lee, Kaak, Iverson, Dresler. Q. I mean did you find any living person ! — A. No, sir ; they were dead people. Q. You found all of De Long's party dead that were with him in that place ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who were with you when you found him! — A. I was associated with Mr. Melville aud Mr. Nindemann in the service. Q. And they have survived ! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you remember that Mr. Collins had any pai^ers on his body ! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who took charge of those papers ! — A. I did till that night. Q. What did you do with them then ! — A. Turned them over to Mr. Melville. Q. Did you (»ver see them afterwards ! — A. No, sir. Q. Have you ever seen since what purports to be the entire papers found on Mr. Collins ! — A. Yes, sir. Q. And where did you see Avhat purported to be the entire papers found on Mr. Collins ! — A. In New York. Q. In whose possession ! — A. In the possession of Dr. Collins. Q. Were the papers that you saw in New York purporting to be the entire papers found on the body of Mr. Collins the entire number that were found ! JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 35 Mr. Arnoux (interposing). No, no 5 is there anything in this inquiry that leads to this investigation ? Mr. Curtis. Why not ? Mr. Arnoux. If, after the expedition had reached land and certain papers found by this gentleman were handed to somebody else, supposing they were destroyed, is that part of this matter? Mr. Curtis. Supposing on one hand it is a fair presumption from the other facts in the case that they were not taken but were confiscated and destroyed. Mr. Arnoux. The physical actual expedition was ended when these men were on the shore. Is what is done a matter of inquiry? The Chairman. I think so ; undoubtedly, Mr. Arnoux. Very well, sir; then I interpose no objection. The Chairman. It was part of the expedition to save the survivors. Mr. Arnoux. No, but these men were dead. The Chairman. That is why I say it is not limited when they came on shore to Mr. Curtis (interposing). I will put the question again. By Mr. CuRTiS: Q. Were the papers that you saw in New York in the possession of Dr. Collins the same in numl3er as those that you saw on the body of his dead brother ? — A. I could not state in regard to the exact number of the papers, but they were not all that I took off of him. Q. You do not know what became of those?— A. No, sir. Q. Those papers were intact when they left your possession? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You did not tamper with them? — A. No, sir. Q. Before you found the body of Collins how long was it before you or 3>uj of yc>ur party heard where he was ? — A. It was only a day be- fore — that is, that we had any positive knowledge where they were. Q. Where were you two months before the body of Collins was found? — A. I think I was in Bulun. Q. That is southwest of the spot on the Lena Eiver, where Collinses body was found, was it? — A. It is to the southward of that. Q. About southwest? — A. I think not; it is to the south. Q. On the opposite side of the Lena Eiver?— A. Well, he was not found on the Lena Eiver proper; he was found on the Lena delta. Q. Was he not found on the right bank of the Lena Eiver, or rather to the right of the Lena Eiver ? — A. Well, it is nearly north ; very little east of the mouth proper of the Lena. Q. But Bulun was either south or a little southwest of the place where his body was found? — A. Yes, sir. Q, His body was found on one side of the river and Bulun is on the other ? — A. Both would be on the same side if you call the spot where he was found the Lena Eiver. Q. Did you not have to cross a river to get to where his body was found? — A. We had to cross several rivers. Q. Did you not have to cross the Lena Eiver? — A. No, sir; not the Lena Eiver proper. Q. Will you please point out on this map, at page 306 of the record of the Court of Inquiry, where you found the body of De Long ?— A. (In- dicating.) It was right in here. Q. Bulun is where you were when you first heard where he was? — A. When we fell in with Nindemann and Noros and heard from them about where he was. 36 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. What boat were they in^ — A. The first cutter. Q. What facilities had you, if any, for traveling from Bulun to this si)ot where the body of Collins was found! — A. Keindeer and dogs. Q. How many in your party were alive at Bulun? — A. We were all alive ; that is, of our immediate party. Q- That is what I mean. Did you have provisions! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were tbey easily obtainable in the country! — A. Well, at certain seasons of the year; yes, such as they were. Q. Well, at that time ! — A. Well, yes; there was plenty of provisions at Bnlnn at that time. Q. Who brought you notice of the position of De Long ! — A. Well, that came immediately from Nindemann and Noros. We received news from Nindemann and Noros b^^ an exile. Q. What was his name; do you remember! — A. His name was K^us- mah. Q. How many days' journey was it from Bulun to the spot where you found Collins !— A. Well, it would depend a good deal ui^on how fast a man travels. Q. Well, with a reindeer team ! — A. And upon the load he had. A man with an ordinary sled-load and ordinary weather could probably make it in three days, or two days and a half. Q. How long was it after you got this information in reference to Collins before you found his dead body ! — A. 1 can't give it exactly. Q. I know you cannot, but approximate it, if you please ! — A. Well, it was three months, I think. Q. Have you any knowledge of how long he had been dead when you found him! — A. Only from De Long's journal. Q. And that information, such as it was, fixed the time at what! What was the last entrj^ in his journal ! — A. I think it read "140th day from the ship. Gortz and Boyd died during night. Mr. Collins dying." October 30, 1 think, was the date. Q. And you found him how soon after that! — A. We found him the last of March. Q. You don't know whether he had ceased to make entries in his journal long before he died or not! — A. Well, I think not from the con- dition that they were in. Q. Now, we will leave that subject for the present. Do yon know, as a matter of fact, Mr. Bartlett, what was the general conduct of Mr. Col- lins on the ship ! — A. Well, I don't know it as a fact any further than personal observation goes. Q. Exactly. — A. His deportment was always gentlemanly, as far as I know. Q. Now, in reference to that matter, did you ever hear any of the officers or men speak about the way in which Mr. Collins was treated, and especially about the trouble that occurred on or about December 2, 1880 ! Mr. Arnoux. I think that should not be answered. Mr. Curtis. It is a matter of common rumor, common report. Mr. Aknoux. If what Collins said was part of the res gestce, surely what other people say is not. They are comi)etent to testify. At that rate every livhig man can be called upon to tell what he heard every living man on the ship say about somebod^^ else. Mr. Curtis. Here was a comparatively small company of thirty-two or thirty-three people originally. Of course they were a community among themselves, and nothing of the slightest character could take place, sui)i)osing the men to be together at the time that it did take JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 37 place, that would escape their ohservatiou, and the treatment was of such a character that it became the subject of common talk and speech. It became a subject of common reputation. Men spoke of it. I think that is evidence. The men are not here to speak for themselves. Mr. Arnoux. I think if it was the complaint of the men about their own affairs that is one thing. But what a man says he thinks about somebody else, and he tells it to another man, and that other man comes here and testifies to it, puts at defiance all rules or laws of evi- dence. Mr. Curtis. Supposing you want to make the test a man's reputa- tion in the community in which he lives. That is a matter of common repute, common rumor. Mr. Arnoux. It is not a question here of reputation. You do not propose to i)rove that these men are of good or bad reputation. Mr. Curtis. I am not proposing anything of the kind, but refer to that simply as matter of illustration. I say here was a small commu- nity. Every act that was committed was known to all, and the char- acter of the treatment was such that it excited the attention of all and they spoke of it. The Chairman. I do not know of any rule carrying the declarations of third persons to that extent. 1 do not think I have ever seen any case where it has been so held in the investigation of facts to ascertain truth. Mr. Curtis. I won't press it, sir. The Chairman. Anything that he kuowshimself, as a matter of course he can tell. By Mr. Curtis ; Q. Did you ever during all this exi)edition observe that Mr. Collins treated Mr. De Long in any other manner than was becoming to a gentleman^ — A. No, sir. Q. I believe you were friendly with both? — A. Yes, sir. Q. It was a part of Mr. Colli ns's duty, I believe, to take the midnight observations on the ship, was it not? — A. Yes, sir; while he was on duty. Q. Give as briefly and comprehensively as you can the history of Mr. Collins's conduct during the retreat that you spoke of, as it came under your observation. — A. His conduct was very good, as far as I know. Q. Who did the work on the retreat? — A. The enlisted men, princi- pally. Q. How about the officers ? — A. They did very little manual labor. They did not do any to amount to anything. Q. Was that true with regard to all the naval officers? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Can you give us ixuy details that now occur to you that illustrate that ? — A. Oh, yes; many times you would see them coming in at night, what we would call the last fleet ot* sleds. They would often congregate on the sunny side of a lump of ice and sit and warm themselves and wait for the people to come up with the boats. I think about eighteen people did the work of thirty- three. Q. Is there anything else that occurs to you ? The Witness In relation to the way they worked us? Mr. Curtis. Yes ; as to Avho did the work, and how it was done on the retreat, and what share or pari, if any, the officers had in it? — A. Ice-Pilot Dunbar used to proceed ahead and stake out a road, and Cap- tain DeLong usually followed after him and either rejected or adopted the road he had staked out, and there w^ere two teams composed of men 38 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. and two teams composed of dogs that used to precede. Mr. Melville at first was in charge of tlie team of men. He used to walk behind ns backwards and forwards making every trip with ns. We had to double the road seven or eight times as a rule to get all our stuff along. Lieu- tenant Chipp at that time was sick. Lieutenant Danenliower was under the doctor's treatment, unable to do anything. He did not do anything during the entire trip. Q. How was Mr. Melville? — A. Mr. Melville was all right. He took charge of the team, walked back and forth, but never assisted at times when we were stuck, except by giving us word to lift. Q. He gave you directions to exercise your muscles? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How did he direct you — in what terms? — A. Well, it was some- times, "Lift, damn you, lift!" and sometimes, "Pull her out, boys." By Mr. Boutelle : Q. This was on the retreat? — A. Yes, sir. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Were there any other expressions that you do not desire to use in the presence of a lady? The Witness. In regard to what? Mr. Curtis. In regard to the directions given to you? — A. Well, no; not that I know of. Q. Any expressions of a coarse character used ? — A. Nothing, onlj^ once in a while, to curse a man a little. That is all, as far as cursing w^eut. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. Hid the men ever use any profane language among themselves ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. It was not confined entirely to the officers? — A. Oh, no, sir; it was not a thing that was generally done; only at times, I say. Q. W^ho did you say went ahead and staked out the road? — A. Ice- Pilot Dunbar, or Mr. Dunbar. We called him Ice-Pilot Dunbar. Q. And Captain De Long went along with him, and either adopted or changed the road? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did it involve any more manual labor to go ahead and stake it out than to change the stakes ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How much ? — A. In carrying the stakes. Q. I understood you to say he would modify them ? — A. Yes ; he did sometimes. Q. And the difference would be that the other man carried the stakes and he did not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. They both traveled over the same ground ? — A. ISTo, sir; because Mr. Dunbar would invariably work and go in many different directions io i)ktk out the best route and stake it, and it was easier for the man to follow along from one flag to the other when he could see ahead of him. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Did you hear any expression by Lieutenant Danenhower that he would have De Long broken when he returned for the manner in which he had conducted the expedition? Mr. Arnoux. I object to that. That certainly is not competent as against De Long and Lieutenant Danenhower. Mr. Curtis. It goes to the general management of the expedition. Mr. Arnoux. Not at all ; not wliat he heard somebody else say. The Chairman. I do not think it is admissible at this stage. It may be at some other stage. I do not know. JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 39 Mr. Curtis. Very well ; I will reserve it. The Chairman. Unless it was said in the presence and hearing of Captain De Long. If it was, of course it is admissible. Mr. Curtis. 1 put it on the theory that it was. Mr. Arnoux. That would imply insubordination. Mr. Curtis We will show it is material a little further on. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Where is Geeomovialocke ? — A. It is situated in the southeastern part or eastern part of the Lena delta. Q. Who was in command of the party to which you were attached after the separation of the boats *? — A. Chief Engineer Melville , and Mr. Danenhower, at times, under instructions from Mr. Melville. Q. Before the separation of the boats were there any general or spe- cial instructions as to the line of the retreat? — A. Not that I have any positive knowledge of; only by hearsay. • Q. Did De Long, to your knowledge, give any instructions as to the line of retreat? The Witness. How do you mean? In boats or from the time of the Mr. Curtis (interposing). Before the separation of the boats were there any general or special instructions given as to the line of retreat? — A. There was at the time of our first starting or beginning to make the retreat. Q. What were they ? — A. I do not remember them in detail; they were read by Captain De Long, I believe; that our line of march would be formed in parties of five each, with a sleigh and three boats. Q. Was there not a written order? — A. Yes; I think he read it from written matter; he wrote it out and read it at general muster, as they call it, or the calling up of all the men. Q. Do you know what instructions were given to Chief Engineer Melville for his guidance in case the boats separated ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. State them. — A. That he was to make the best of his way to Barkin. Q.- Where is that? — A. Barkin is at the northeastern extremity of the Lena delta. There he was supposed to obtain a pilot, and then to place himself as soon as possible in communication with the Eussians. I think that was the reading of the order. I saw it only once. Q. Before the separation of the boats what was the condition of the party as far as health was concerned? — A. First rate. Q. State the course of the party under the charge of Chief Engineer Melville from September 16, when land was sighted ? — A. We proceeded into the mouth of the river, all of ns feeling pretty well because we had got to land and tried to make a landing, but were prevented from so doing by the shoalness of the water in the river, and finally the boat was turned around and started oilt of the river again to find Barkin, not knowing where it was, but supposing it was to the northward of us. I objected to the boat being taken out of the river again. I did not want to go. I thought that that river was as large as the Missis- sippi and must eventually take us to some point farther up the river. Then the boat was turned back and continued on up the river. Q. Did not the natives tell Lieutenant Danenhower, on September 21, that Bulun was six sleeps or days fartlier, and that there were tra- ders and merchants there ? — A. We supposed that that is what they told us. They did it by making signs as if going to sleep, a continuous 40 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. number of times, to indicate six or seven days. That was at the first meeting with natives in the delta. Q. Did you not request Melville to i)usli on to Bulun at this time! — A. Not at that time. That was afterwards. Q. When was that! — A. I made a proposition wliile we were in Gee- omovialocke to go to Bulun, after we had been there, I guess, about two weeks. Q. How did he receive the proposition ! — A. Well, I think that he was rather inclined to act upon it at first, but through the discussions we had over it, and the influence that was brought to bear against the proposition, it was given up. Q. Did he assign any reason for his refusal to act upon your sugges- tion ! — A. No, sir ; I think it was done through what Mr. Daneuhower said in regard to it. Q. And what did he say about it! — A. Well, he said he considered himself physically the best man in the party, and that he thought if we undertook to make the trip in the way we proposed to do it 25 per cent, of us would be carried into Bulun either dead or on sleds. Q. What was your own opinion on that subject! — A. Well, at that time I thought we could do it, or I should not have made the proposi- tion. Q. Did after events prove that you were correct! — A. Yes; I think that we could have made the trip. Q. What was the physical condition of the different members of the party at the time you made this proposition! — A. Well, it was compar- atively good. Some of them were a very little lame. One of them, I think, could not walk — Leach — that is, could scarcely walk. Q. Did you have provisions ! — A. Very little, sir. Q. Did you have any facilities for traveling ! — A. There were facili- ties in the country, but they were not used or adopted. There were dogs there. Q. Could they have been obtained!— A. J think so; yes, sir. Q. In what way! — A. Well, merely by taking them. By Mr. BOTJTELLE: Q. Where were they, in the possession of some people ! — A. Thej^ were in the possession of the natives that lived there. We were living in a small native town at the time. By Mr. Curtis : Q. You could have hired them or bought them !- -A. Yes ; we after- wards hired them. Q. You at no time ever contemplated stealing th^m ! — A. Well, we did not know but we might take a team if we had a good chance. Q. How soon after the arrival of the party at Geeomovialocke were the members in a condition to travel ! — A. I think in about sixteen days. Q. What was done during the stay at Geeomovialocko to spread the news of the missing boats ! — A. Well, there was not a great deal done= What little there was, was done by Mr. Daneuhower visiting Kus- mah's. That was a place some three or four miles to the southeast. Q. That was the person you have already spoken of! — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was done with him! — A. Well, I don't know; I was not there to hear it. Q. Was there any talk among the members of the party that some- thing should be done; if so, what was said on that subject! — A. We JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 41 were all very anxious to get on towards home, very anxious to go, and I believe Daneuliower proposed to make a search. He used to talk that way in general, ordinary conversation, and all volunteered, I guess, at different times to search, but there was never anything done further than what Mr. Danenhower did. He went off' and was gone a day or two ; went to the southeast of where we were living, about 15 or 20 miles, I should judge — 25, possibly — and back again. Q. Where did he think he was going ; do you know ? — A. He said he was going to Barkin, or was going to try to get there. Q. Barkin was in the other direction, was it not?— A. It was to the northeast or to the north of us. Q. Did you speak to Mellville about going on ; if so, what did he say ? — A. Well, he said he didn't know whether we could do it or not, but he said it was his opinion that we could make it. 1 think that he was influenced a great deal by Mr. Danenhower. Q. What influence, if any, was brought to bear to prevent you going at that time ? — A. Well, the statement I have already made in regard to the hardships that we would have to undergo. Q. Do you remember the day of Kusmah's visit to Geeomovialocke? — A. I think it was on the 10th of September j I am not positive in re- gard to these dates, because I have forgotten. Q. How long did he state it would take to go to Bulun and return?— A. He said that it would take him five days. Q. Do you know the reason why some members of the party were not allowed to go with him ? — A. Well, I think it was owing to a jealousy that existed between Melville and Danenhower. Q. Was there such a jealousy? — A. Apparently so. Q. How was that typified; how was it shown? — A. Ln iheir general conversation with the different people. Q. Well, with you? — A. Yes, sir. Q- What was it? — A. On Mr. Danenhower's part I think it was caused by the treatment he received from De Long, and by being placed under orders by him under Melville. Then I think he felt as though he had the legal right to be in charge of the party, and Mr. Melville was, I think, afraid that if he allowed Mr. Danenhower to go to Bulun he would send dispatches to America that he knew nothing of, and, per- haps, gain control of the party. Q. Did you have any conversation with either Melville or Danenhower on that subject ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. With whom ?— A. With both of them. Q. What did Danenhower say to you on that subject ? — A. Danen- hower spoke to me in regard to it, and said that he thought if lie had charge of the party he could make it much easier for the people, and he could control the labor to be performed mlich better than Mr. Melville could. Q. And what did Melville say to you on the same subject? — A. Mel- ville said to me that he did not think he would let Danenhower go to Bulun, for fear that he would send some dispatches to America that he did not know of. Q. Then there was a jealousy as to who should reap the glory of this business ? — A. I think so ; yes, sir. Q. Was it possible to get transportation to Bulun, because Kus^iah started ?— A. Yes ; it would have been possible to go there. It is pos- sible at any season of the year to go there from Geeomovialocke. Q. AVhen were the first efforts made to relieve the De Long party ? — A. They were made about the 4th of October, I think, or the 2nd, or 42 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. somewheres along there, when Mr. Melville started from Buliin to go north looking after them. Q. Are you sure about the month ; was it October or November or December? — A. Well, I don't know i)Ositivel.Y. Mr. BouTELLE. If he does not remember, it does not seem as though his evidence on that point would be important. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Have yon any means of refreshing your memory on that point? — A. Yes, I have notes and records. Q. Will you be kind enough to briag them at the next hearing ? — A. They are at my home. I have sent for them, they will be here in a day or so, I expect. Q. Is it not a fact that Danenhower simply tried to get to Barkin and was not looking for the missing parties ? — A. Well, I don't know what his intentions were ; I can't say. Q. Was it possible to get away from Bulun sooner than jou did ? — A. Yes, we could have got away the day that we went there. Q. Was it possible for you to get away sooner from Geeomovialocke going to Bulun 1 — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was it possible to get away sooner than Kusmah went 1 — A. It would not have been an impossibility, but it was not a practical scheme, I don't think. Q. But you could have got away sooner than you actually did 1 — A. W^e could have got away at the time Kusmah went, yes. Q. When you first got to Geeomovialocke was it not possible to get to Bulun by boat ? — A. Yes, I think it was possible. Q. Was it true that the first messenger that it was possible to send was sent to Bulun for the relief of your party ? — A. Well, yes, sir j in our interests. Q. Could not some of the members of the party have been sent be- fore '? — A. They could have been sent with him or even before him. Q. Well could you not have sent some of the members of your party before you did? — A. I think so ; yes, sir. Q. How about the fact ; was the party in a physical condition to make a search in October ? — A. Yes, generally. Some of them were not in a condition. Q. How many of them were in a condition to make that search in October ? — A. Well, all of them, with the exception of two or three, I think. Q. Were you, or any other members of the party in a condition dur- ing the month of October to make an effort to relieve De Long! — A. Yes, sir. Q. No effort was made in October to relieve De Long, was there? — A. I think not. Q. Well, what is your memory about that ?— A. I do not know. I will take that back. I would rather stop the answer to that question until I get my notes, because I am not positive in regard to it. Q. Very well ; you shall do so. Was it possible at any time to get sufficient food and transportation to go to De Long, or if you knew De- Long's condition to aid him ? The Witness. At what time? Mr. Curtis. In October? A. Yes, sir. Q. It was possible? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was the distance from Geeomovialocke to wliere the bodies JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 43 were found? — A. Well, we used to guess at it. I think they guessed it at 200 versts. Mr. AiiNOUX. Kot what you guessed it. The Witness. There is no means of measurement in that country ; it is all guess work. The Chairman. You may give your opinion. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Two hundred Russian versts ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How manydays' journey would that be? — A. About two days and a half or three days, according to the going. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. From where? — A. From Geeomovialocke to where De Long was found. Q. That is farther than it would be from Bulun to the place where they would be found, is it not? — A. I think it is about an equal dis- tance ; somewheres near equal. By Mr. Curtis : Q. What is the distance of Ku Mark-Surk to the point where the bodies were found ? — A. I shall have to guess that. 1 can only give my opinion. Q. Well, give your opinion. — A. I think it is about 45 miles, as near as I could guess at it. Q. When you heard that De Long had landed, had you or any other person in your party any idea of his whereabouts? — A. No, sir. Q. Was it not communicated to you by those who informed you of the landing ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you never talli among yourselves about his probable posi- tion ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Well? — A. We used to talk about it frequently while we were at Geeomovialocke. Q. And how near did you come in your estimate to his exact position ? — A. Well, we got him pretty close sometimes, in our ideas only. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. What did you judge from ? — A. From the course of the rivers on the north side of the Delta. Knowing that his intention was to go to the north mouth of the river, we supposed that he had landed, and was either traveling to the south in his boat before the frost, or else that he was traveling, to the southward on foot, or living with some people. By the Chairman : Q. That is going up the river, is it not? — A. Yes, it is going up the river. By Mr. CuRTiS : Q. Was this the reason, if it was assigned, that a search could not be made; that Seaman Leach's feet remained bad and Danenhower's eyes seemed to trouble him ? — A. His eyes troubled him ; yes, sir. Q. Did that prevent the search ? — A. Well, no, not necessarily. There were plenty of others that were physically all right. Q. And did the mere fact that Seaman Leach's feet remained bad prevent the search ? — A. No, sir. Q. Others could have joined in the search, could they not ? — A. Yes, sir. 44 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. Was that reason assigned by Melville, to your knowledge ? — A. No, sir. Q. If he has ever testified to that effect it is a mistake, is it not? — A. I don't know as I clearly understand what you mean. Q. If he testified that the reason why the party coukl not join in the search was that Danenhower's eyes were bad, and that Seaman Leach's feet remained bad, or words to that effect, he is mistaken, is he? — A. Yes, sir. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. Do you mean to say that you know that he never said such a thing '? — A. I did not say that he never said such a thing. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Was not Seaman Leach as well able to travel during the month of October, or at any time after reaching tlie village of Geeomovialocke, as he was until he reached Jakutsk? — A. Well, yes; nearly so. Q. W^as the condition of any other member of the party a bar against the search for the missing parties? — A. Not after about sixteen days after their landing — after we had been ashore about sixteen or seven- teen days. Q. In other words, it did not prevent well people looking for the miss- ing parties'? — A. No, sir. Q. At an 5^ time after the arrival of the party at Geeomovialocke w^as any effort made to reach Buhm by water? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Wlien? — A. The morning after we arrived at Geeomovialocke. Q. By whom? — A. The whole party and three natives. Q. Was it successful or otherwise? — A. Unsuccessful, sir. Q. For what reason? — A. Well, because I don't think the effort was made with energy enough, and another reason is that I had acted as pilot in the boat from the time we had come in the river. I was placed forward with a pole to sound the depths of the water, and there was a well-marked current that could be distinguished by the roughness of the water caused by the wind and the current combined. Q. To whom do you attribute, in your opinion, that want of energy ? — A. To the peoi)le in charge. Q. Who were in charge? — A. Mr. Melville. Well, Mr. Danenhower, I believe, was giving orders under Mr. Melville's instructions. Q. When Kusmah left for Bulun, what directions or instructions did he receive in reference to the missing parties? — A. Well, I guess not any. Q. You were in the party? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You saw him when he left? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You saw him at his departure? — A. From our house. Q. Who were present in the company when lie departed? — A. We were all there. Q. You could have heard anything that took i)lace between Kusmah and any of your party, could you not? — A. Yes. Q. Then did you hear any instructions or directions given to Kusmah in reference to the missing parties?— A. No, sir; I did not. Q. W^here was Kusmah going? — A. He was supposed to go to Bulun. Q. Was Kusmah given any instructions to spread the news of your missing shipmates by Melville? Did Melville tell liim wherever he went to spread the news of your missing shipmates, De Long and others? — A. I don't think Melville did, but Danenhower did, however, through the instructions of Mr. Melville. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 45 Mr. Arnoux. I would like to know if tbe witness means to be under- stood as swearing positively that no instructions were given. The Witness. I said that I heard none. Mr. Arnoux. Do you mean that you were so present that at all times whea conversations were had with this man, that you know of your own knowledge that he had no instructions whatever from either Melville or Danenhower? The Witness. No, sir; I do not testify that. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. How long had this Kusm ah been with your party? — A. He had only seen us once or twice. Q. I mean at this time, immediately before he left, how long had he been with you! — A. I don't think he was there since October. A half or three-quarters of an hoi«», may be an hour in the house. It might have been longer. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Was Kusmah to your knowledge given any written information to be handed to the Russian authorities as to the situation of De Long's boats or the missing parties'? — A. Not to my knowledge. Q. At this time you were on Russian soil, or within Russian do- mains 1 — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were any instructions or directions to your personal knowledge given by Mr. Melville to the Russian authorities in reference to the missing boats ! The Witness. While at Geeomovialocke, do you mean "? Mr. Curtis. To Kusmah, I mean. Were any written directions given to Kusmah, to your knowledge, to communicate with the Russian au- thorities? — A. No, sir. Q. Or to give any notice of the missing boats or parties?— A. No, sir. Q. Did you ever hear or know of Mr. Danenhower remonstrating with Melville for his neglect in this matter after Kusmah left? — A. No. Q. Did you ever hear Danenhower say, " Melville, you forgot a very important point in your conversation of the day before with Kusmah ; you forgot to tell Kusmah to spread the news as he went along the road as to the other missing parties?" — A. No, sir. Q. If Kusmah was able to go to Bulun was it not possible for your party to get there at the same time? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Is it not a fact that all the transportation dog teams that were necessary for the party were found at Geeomovialocke when Melville made up his mind to start the day before the last man in De Long's party died ? — A. All transportation that carried the party to Bulun came from a place called Arrii, close by Geeomovialocke. Q. Was not that north of Geeomovialocke? — A. About 2 miles, probably. Q. And I think you will remember you stated that the journey could, under ordinary circumstances, be accomplished in two or three days? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Could net the same transportation haye been procured before, in case of urgent necessity ? — A. Yes, sir. Mr. Boutelle. To go to this place, do you mean ? Mr. Curtis. Yes, to the succor of De Long. By Mr. Curtis : Q. If you had been sent on with Kusmah, and had started an expedi- tion north along the route that De Long had agreed to take, what would 46 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. have been the chances of saving De Long's party 1 — A. Well, I think they would have been small. Q. But still there might have been a chance ? — A. A possible chance, yes. Q. If, after a rest, of say sixteen days, say at Geeomovialocke, the party had reached Bulun in three days, which would have been the 13th of October, and a party was started north along De Long's line of re- treat, what would have been the chances of saving De Long's party under those circumstances ! — A. Well, they would have been very poor. Q. Still there would have been chances? — A. A chance to have saved some of them, probably. Mr. BouTELLE. Is this traveling over the same ground that this witness was examined on before the court of inquiry? Mr. Curtis. No, sir; you will find, if my recollection serves me cor- rectly, that his testimony extends from page 270 to page 277. In fact, he was bottled up, like Butler at Bermuda Hundreds. Mr. BouTELLE. 1 understand he was asked here repeatedly if it were l)0ssible to move sooner, and he says no. By the Judge -Advocate : In your opinion, was it necessary to delay thirty-five days before making any eifort to get news of or go in search of tlie other parties? Answer. As far as I know it was impossible for sixteen days, to the best of my memory, to travel from where we were, and at the expiration of that time Mr. Mel- ville made arrangements with Kusmah to take dispatches to Bnlnn and also return with transx^ortation and clothing for the entire party to Bulun, with the understanding that he would arrive back with means of transportation in five days, but did not re- turn for fifteen, as I remember it. I think we moved from there as soon as it was practicable. Mr. Curtis. He can be asked about that on cross-examination. Mr. BouTELLE. I was only calling your attention to it. I did not know but you were traveling over the same ground. He says : In your opinion, was it possible to have sooner commenced the search for the De Long party ? Which was a very comprehensive question. Answer. No, sir ; not the proper search for them. As stated before, I thought we could have moved from Geeomovialocke in about twenty days from the time we landed. Mr. Curtis. Generally his opinion is the same now. The trouble there was they asked him general comprehensive questions, and he gave a general comprehensive opinion. Here we ask him about details, and in the details he is with us, and yet many of the comprehensive opin- ions seem to be inconsistent with the details. Mr. BouTELLE. You asked him why he did not start with the whole party, and he answered that it was because he thought Melville or some one in charge thought they would not have physical strength to hold out. Before he was asked : Were you prevented from doing so ; if so, by whom ? Answer. Yes, sir. By the general opinion of the whole party. The reason of it was that we were unfamiliar with the country, had no means of transportation, and no provisions, only what was furnished by the natives we were living with. It seems to me we are going over the same general ground. Mr. Curtis. I will ask him tliis question : Q. If the party had reached Bulun on the 13th and started up north, vvnen would you have reached De Long ! According to your state- ment you would have reached him on the 16th, would you not ? — A. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 47 Well, I think it would be possible to make that distance in three days, but whether the traveling would have been in condition to have allowed us to make it in three days is a different matter. Q. I will ask you whether, in your examination before the Board of Inquiry, you were not asked in relation to all these details about which I am inquiring? — A. ^Oy sir. Q. You were simply asked in general your opinion in a comprehen- sive manner, were you not! — A. Yes, sir; it was my opinion mostly. Q. At that time there was no one to question you on behalf of Mr. Collins, was there! — A. There was a set of questions that were asked me by the judge- advocate that were written, I think, by Mr. Collins. Q. But there were no questions put to you by anybody except the judge-advocate ! — A. No, sir. Q. You certainly were not asked in detail as I have asked you, were you ! — A. No, sir. Q. I ask you now if the party reached Bulun on the 13th, and started up north, when would you have reached De Long! You have already testified it was about three days' journey. — A. I think if we had known where he was, possibly, we could have reached him in about three days. Q. I now ask you the question, knowing as you did, and not know- ing positively where he was, if you had gone north for three days after the 16th along the line of the river would you have reached that part of the country in which De Long's body was found!— A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, as matter of fact, what, under those circumstances, would have been your chances of finding him! — A. Well, I could not tell what the facts would be in regard to a search, but the probabilities, I think, are that we would not have found him. Q. Did not De Long have large signal fires burning at night ! — A, So says his journal ; yes, sir. Q. Would you not have seen those ! — A. We might for a certain dis tance ; for a distance of 5 or 6 miles. Q. Would not those have attracted your notice ! — A. Yes, sir j if wo had been in sight of them they would. Q. How far could you have seen over the naked country! — A. Well, I don't know ; I should judge, may be, under favorable circumstances, you could see on a level two miles or a mile and a half. Q. Could you see farther with a glass ! — A. I don't know whether you could or not. I cannot. Q. The glass does not aid your vision at all ! — A. Not as regards dis- tance ; no, not a great deal. Q. Did you hear Nindemann and Noros complain of the delay at Geeomovialocke, in Siberia ! — A. Well, Nindemann said to me that he thought we ought to have done something to relieve their condition while we were there. Q. And did Noros say the same thing ! — A. I don't know whether I ever had a conversation with Noros or not. Q. But Nindemann, you are quite sure, thought that your party had shown negligence in not trying to relieve De Long !-^A. That was the substance of the conversation ; yes, sir. Q. Do you know what charts or maps De Long had during the re- treat! — A. Positively, no. He had a small chart that he used, I think, while he was in the delta, that came out of some printed book or other. Q. Did that pretend to give him a fair knowledge of the country !— A. No, sir ; I don't think he had any knowledge of the country much j very little. His own journal says that. Q. In your judgment, was there not as good a prospect for De Long's 48 JEANNETTE INQUIYY. party and Chipp's party to get through as yours ? — A. I don't think there was as stroLg a prospect for Mr. Chipp or as good a chance. Q. Why i — A. Because he had an inferior boat. Q. Was there as good a chance for De Long's party originally ? — A. Yes, I think there was. Q. Were there any boats left behind in the ship ? — A. I think the whale-boat that was left was a better sea-boat than the second cutter. Q. It was essential to have a good sea-boat, was it not ! — A. Yes j very much so. Q. Better than the second cutter "? — A. Yes ; a better sea boat. Q. Why was she not taken f — A. I don't know, sir. Q. Was tlie other boat taken because it was inferior *? — A. I think not. I think it was taken because it was a lighter boat and was con- sidered capable of doing what they wanted it to. Q. It was a matter of judgment as to which would have been the best boat, all things considered ? — A. Yes, sir. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Do you know whether or not Mr. Collins was allowed to write on shipboard, to have and keep writing materials and records, &c., after the arrest or the suspension ! — A. He told me that it was forbidden Mr. Arnoux (interposing). No, no ; I object to what he said on the subject. Mr. Curtis. I submit that that is competent. It is within the other ruling. It is part of the treatment. Mr. Arnoux. It is not part of the res gestce of the transaction. Mr. Curtis. Most decidedly. Here is a scientific gentleman whose very usefulness is destroyed if you take away his instruments and his records. It is already in proof that his instruments were taken from him graduallj^ He was not permitted to work them. And now after you arrest him, you suspend him, you do not even allow him to draw his sick companions along in a sled like an Esquimau dog. You take away his recjords, you take away his writing material. Mr. Arnoux. If he knows that they were taken away, I do not ob- ject to his testifying. But what he heard somebody else say had been done comes exactly within the ruling that you cannot establish the fact by the man's declaration ; that if you establish the fact, then you can annex the declaration as part of the res gestae to show why it was done. Mr. Curtis. The chairman ruled on that objection some time ago that it was part of a continuous ill-treatment, a system, and therefore it was a i)art of the res gestce. Mr. Arnoux. Establish the fact that it was done, and then what he said in connection with it is competent. Mr. BouTELLE. I do not understand that the chairman has ruled that the sus})ension was ill-treatment. The Chairman. I have not ruled that. But acts explanatory of that can be given in evidence. Mr. Curtis. How can the committee rule otherwise ? Mr. BouTELLE. One reason would be that I would want to have a voice in that, and there is another gentleman of the committee to say whether that is ill-treatment or not. The Chairman. I have not passed on the eflect of the evidence at all. It was only on the admissibility of it. Mr. BouTi<:Lr.E. Exactly. I said that you had not ruled that this was ill-treatment, but that this was a condition continuing, and the witness was allowed to testify. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 49 Mr. OUETis. Here is a man sent on a mission to do a specific thing. He is entered on the books as a seaman for the reasons that have been repeated. His special character is not only ignored, but dishonored. It may be he considered that good treatment. I doubt it. Mr. BouTELLE. That is entirely a question of discipline. Mr. Curtis. His instruments are taken from him. Mind you, he is not a common seaman before the mast, although technically on the books he is made to be so. He is a cultured scientific gentleman, periling his life in the interests of science that his country might have the glory of new discoveries, and the very paraphernalia that he has with him is taken without authority. Mr. BouTELLE. That is to be established. Mr. Curtis. Without authority so far as the evidence up to this time shows. Mr. BOUTELLE. Why, He Long was the commander of the expedi- tion. Mr. Curtis. That makes no difference, may it please the committee. These instruments were to be used by Collins. He was there for that purpose, and it was the good faith of the Government that was to be kept with Mr. Bennett, the originator of this enterprise, that so far from being degraded and dishonored in his capacity as a scientific man he should have had every facility Mr. BOUTELLE (interposing). Now, if the counsel will permit me I will call his attention to something, because this is a matter which goes directly to the foundation of this committee and their authority. The act of Congress authorizing this expedition distinctly says: The vessel to proceed ou her voyage of exploration under the orders and instruc- tions of the Navy Department: That the men so ''specially enlisted" as above shall be subject in all respects to the Articles of War and Navy regulations and discipline. Mr. Curtis. Yes. Mr. BouTELLE. Now, a question of fact may be raised. 1 do not say" but Captain He Long ill-treated this man. That is not my point at all. I am not sure that he did not grossly ill-treat him. I am not sure that he did ill-treat him, and the mere fact of suspending that officer or taking the instruments would not in itself constitute ill-treatment or degradation under any interpretation of the naval regulations. Mr. Curtis. I shall contend most strenuously that it did, and before I get through I shall tr;f to convince the committee of that fact. You see, wherever we try to advance we are like the Jeannette itself, be- tween two ribs of ice. Now, Congress never contemplated, when it passed that law, that a gentleman of culture should be, as it were, as he says in one of his melancholy letters, entrapped into this expedition. Mr. BOUTELLE. That is irrelevant. Mr. Curtis. No ; but what I say is this, with respect to the commit- tee. This nation does not expect you to decide this investigation on technicalities. We have had too much of that. This nation expects this question before this committee to be decided upon the good faith of the parties, and if Mr. Collins was induced to join that expedition, as we will prove he was, and as we have proved he was ifiduced to join it, with th6 expectation of serving his country and his Government Mr. BouTELLE (interposing). I beg the counsel's pardon. There is an absolute lack of evidence as to how the gentleman joined the expe- dition. I am hungry for it. Mr. Curtis. This witness testified to it. Mr. BouTELLE. What does this gentleman know about the terms under which that gentleman enlisted? 50 JEA.NNETTE INQUIRY. Mr. Curtis. Does the committee take the grouud that you canuot prove as a physical fact the relations of a man in the Army i Mr. BouTELLE. I undertake to say that he cannot testify as to the terms on which Mr. Collins enlisted. The Chairman. Captain De Long admits that he was known, and by him entitled, as a meteorologist. Mr. BouTELLE. Exactly. But he does not indicate that he was re- lieved from the operations of the naval law in any way. There is a little difficulty evidently in the mind of counsel, I think, and perhaps others in regard to this point, a feeling that there is some anomaly or incongruity between a i^erson's being a gentleman of culture and occu- pying a subordinate position on a vessel of war. I have had gentlemen with me on the vessels on which I have been of the very highest culture occupying very subordinate positions indeed, and while on shipboard subjected to the strictest operations of military law. Mr. Curtis. We do not contend that. What I say is this : Here was a gentleman, a scientific man sent, as this country knows, not as a com- mon seaman, but sent out there on a scientific mission, and it is in my judgment an insult to the intelligence of this oountry to argue anything else, and after this man has forfeited his life in that expedition and the attempt is made to vindicate his memory, we are met with the technical objection, ''You were simply a seaman on board that vessel." Mr. BouTELLE. I do not make that statement. I think the evidence shows that he was treated as something better than a seaman. We have wandered a long way from the point. I do not wish to hamper counsel. The point I wish to call your attention to is this: That the line of questions seems to be drifting into an assumption on the part of counsel tbat Captain De Long in the exercise of his naval authority in suspending from his duties a person under his command had committed a wrong. Now, we have to have evidence of that fact before we can admit it. Mr. Curtis. We cannot put in all the evidence at one time. And I declare it to be a matter of law, and I challenge the opinion of the best lawyers in this city, much better lawyers than I, that it is perfectly competent for me to prove The Chairman (interposing). I think this is embraced in the formal ruling that while the arrest continued and the witness, if it comes within that rule, can state that it was between the time of what he calls the suspension or arrest and between the time that he testified to about having the rope and being ordered to let it go, it is admissible. Mr. Curtis. I will ask the stenographer to repeat the question. Q. (Repeated.) Do you know whether or not Mr. Collins was allowed to write on shipboard, to have and keep writing materials, and records, &c., after the arrest or the suspension ? — A. He told me that he had been refused all his writing materials, and the privilege of keeping it in his room. Mr. Arnoux. I submit that that does not state the fact. The Chairman. I think the declarations of Collins at that time are admissible. By Mr. Curtis: Q. Did he tell you anything else on that subject ? — A. No, sir j not in regard to the writing materials. Q. In regard to anything else that he was deprived of? — A. No, I don't know as he did at that time. Q. Did he say anything to you about his records ? — A. Yes, sir. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 51 Q. When was thaf? — A. It was within the time of the suspension. Q. What did he say about his records'? — A. He told me at one time that he had a condensed account of the entire trip with him. That was after we were on the ice. Q. Did he tell you what had become of that, or did you know what had become of that ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did he ^ive you any directions as to what disposition he desired to make of any papers in case of his death "? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What were they ! — A. To take them to New York and give them to his brother. Q. Did you have any conversation with him about that time as to the general conduct of the expedition, as to whether or not it would proba- bly meet the fate of the expedition of Sir John Franklin? Mr. Arnoux. I object to that. That certainly does not come within any ruling the committee has made. Mr. Curtis. No, it does not ; I withdraw it. We have asked him now all that we want at present, but we want particularly to examine these charts, &c., and we may ask him a few more questions. By Mr. Arnoux ; Q. When was it that you first learned of the suspension, as you have termed it, of Mr. Collins "? — A. It was right at the time of the occur- rence, or the night after. Q. Oh, but tell us when it was. You have talked of it in a general way, but we do not know anything about when it was. — A. I don't know the date now. Q. To the best of your recollection when was it! — A. I think it was about a year after we went out. Q. That would be about when ? — A. I think it was in the fall of 1880. Q. When you were on the ice did I understand you as testifying to this committee positively that you heard Captain De Loug use an oath when he repeated the order for Mr. Collins to let go of the rope ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you positive of that 1 — A. Yes, sir. Q. Is your recollection SbUj better now than it was when you were examined before the Court of Inquiry on that subject ! — A. No, sir. Q. In the Court of Inquiry you Avere asked — Did yon know of any trouble existing between Mr. Collins and Lieutenant-Com- mander De Long ? Do you remember that question being put to you'?— A. I do not re- member now whether it was put to me or not. Q. This answer is recorded ; No, sir ; I knew of no existing trouble between tbem. I never heard Lieutanant De Long say an unpleasant word to Mr. Collins. Did you so testify 1 — A. It is down here as such, sir. Q. Did you so testify !— A. Well, I don't remember the answer, but I suppose I did. Q. Now, do you mean to say that your testimony is true that he ad- dressed him with an oath, and that the testimony that you gave before the Court of Inquiry is correct that you never heard him say an un- pleasant word to Mr. Collins!— A. Well, we didn't think oaths unkind- ness with us altogether. They were used in ordinary conversation. Q. Therefore when you spoke of it as you did on your direct exam- ination, you did not mean to create an impression in the minds of this committee that it was said in any unpleasantness, did you 1 — A. Well, 52 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. I think that at the time he said it his intention was to impress it upon Mr. Collins that he wanted him to let go when he ordered him to. Q. And do you think it was only that and that it was in no way said in a spirit of unpleasantness ? — A. Well, I don't know what a man^s spiritual feelings is like when he makes a remark, of course. Q. You said that you never heard Lieutenant De Long sa.y an unpleas- ant word to Mr. Collins; is that true ? — A. Well, if you consider it Q. (Interposing.) No; I am asking you. You are the witness, not I. I am taking what you consider. — A. Well, we did not consider swear- ing unpleasantness, as a rule. Q. But you talk about the rule. I am talking about this particular incident. You say that in one instance you heard Lieutenant De Long address Mr. Collins with an oath ? — A. He did. Q. I ask you, in view of your former testimony, did you ever hear Lieutenant De Long say an unpleasant word to Mr. Collins ? — A. Only this oath. Q. Do you call that an unpleasant word ? — A. Not always ; no, sir. Q. No; but in this particular instance? — A. Well, I don't know whether he meant it to be unx>leasant towards him or whether he meant it to give him to understand that he had got to obey quicker. Q. Now then, having that in joiw mind, I ask you is this statement true that you never heard Lieutenant De Long say an unpleasant word to Mr. Collins, without any exception at all "? — A. With this single ex- ception. Q. No ; without any exception. Excepting nothing, is it true that vou never heard Lieutenant De Long say an unpleasant word to Mr. Collins I The Witness. Is that taking my judgment into consideration? Mr. Arnoux. Taking all that you choose under oath and when you were under oath before ? — A. Well, I don't know. Mr. De Long didn't swear very often, but as to what his feelings were I don't know whether they were pleasant or otherwise at the time. Q I am simply asking you to just answer this question without any exceptions. Knowing all that you do know, and knowing all that you knew when you testilied before the Court of Inquiry, is your statement true or false that you made before the Court of Inquiry ? I never heard Lieutenant De Long say an unpleasant Avord to Mr. Collins. A. Well, there was a feeling existing with us men at that time that we did not feel at liberty before that court to state what we would have stated under other circumstances. Q. I am not asking what your feelings were, but whether you testified to the truth or falsely when you answered on that investigation — I never lieard Lieutenant De Long say an unpleasant word to Mr. Collins. A. I think the testimony is true, sir. Q. Did you ever on any other occasion hear Captain De Long use an oath ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How frequently ?— A. Not very frequently, sir. Q. Was it not an order of the vessel that there should be no pro- fanity ? — A. I believe that was one of the written general orders. He was not a swearing man by any means. Q. Now in what part of the ship's crew did you belong, to the ofiicers' mess? — A. No, sir; I did not. Q. To what part did you belong? — A. I belonged to the forward part of the shix), in what is properly known as the forecastle. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 53 Q. Was that the part of the ship to which all enlisted seamen be- longed ? — A. Where we lived 5 yes, sir. Tliat was the living apartment of all but two. Q. Was Mr. Collins in the forecastle or in the officers' mess ? — A. He lived in the officers' mess. Q. Did he, after this alleged suspension from duty, continue to live there, or was he sent into the forecastle "? — A. ISTo, sir ; he continued to live there. Q. With the officers ^— A. Yes, sir. Q. Did the suspension have any other effect, so far as you know, upon Mr. Oollins's relation with the other officers and with Captain De Long than to relieve him from active duty ! — A. Ho, sir. Q. All that you mean to say is, that that was all the effect it had, is it not"? — A. That is, with his domestic relations with him, as far as I know. Q. So that from that time forth he was treated precisely in the same manner that he had been before, except that he was virtually a passen- ger, instead of a working member of the crew *? — A. As far as 1 know, yes. Q. ISTow, do you remember what books there were, or papers of Mr. Collins's that you delivered to his brother in New York "i — A. I deliv- ered none, sir, to his brother in Kew York. Q. Or what there were that you saw with his brother in IsTew York, that were shown to you ! — A. I saw a small leather-bound note book. I saw another note-book that had been made out of foolscap i3aper, I think, or some other i)aper, unruled, and a few pieces of paper — that is, scraps, small notes — and a letter or two. Q. Kow, was the written paper or the foolscap in separate sheets or fastened together when you saw it in New York "? — A. It had been made in book form 5 I think it was in two pieces. Q. And two pieces when you saw it originally ? — A. In New York 1 Q. Was there any less of that foolscap when you saw it in New York than there had been when you first took the papers off of Mr. De Long's body 1 — A. There was one bundle Q. (Interposing.) No j I say of this foolscap book that you saw in New York 'i — A. I don't know ; I never opened the book. Q. Did it appear to you to contain the same amount of foolscap that you took off of Mr. Collins's body ? — A. Yes } the book might, for all that I know, .because I had never seen the book topayrtny attention to it. Q. Did the note-book which you saw in New York seem to be the same note-book that you took off of his body ^, — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did the letters seem to be as many in number as those you took off of his body? — A. No, sir; the written matter that was in a loose state Avas not as bulky as it was when I took it off of him. Q. Did you take special notice of the amount there was of this written matter when you took it off his body? — A. As closely as I could under the circumstances ; yes, sir. Q. You say it was his request that in case of his death and your sur- vivorship you should take charge of his papers and carry them to his brother in New York? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What did you do with them when you found them? — A. I gave them to Mr. Melville. Q. How long after you found them ?— A. About three hours, I guess. Q. Were you in good health at the time you found them ?— A. Yes, sir. 54 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. How long did tbey remain in Mr. Melville's possession after you delivered them to bim ? — A. I don't know, sir. Q. When did you next see those papers ? — A. The next time I saw them was in New York. Q. Did you make any memorandum, or i)ut any mark upon any of these papers which you found on Mr. Oollins's body ? — A. Not on any paper 5 no sir. Q. And did you read any of the papers ? — A. I read part of the note- book, but the written matter was doubled up ; it was frozen when I got it, and I did not open it to read it, and never had an opportunity after- wards. Q. Now, was there ice and snow around these papers ? — A. There was frost in his pockets ; yes. Q. Did that add to the weight of the papers'? — A. I think not, ma- terially, because it was dry. Q. How manj^ letters, in your judgment, were there less when you saw those papers in New York than there were when you got them from his body"? — A. I don't know, sir; but I should judge that one-quarter of tbe bulk was missing. Q. Of tbe letters *? — A. I don't know wh ether it was letters or what it was, because I had nev^er seen it. It was written papers or papers with written matter on them. Q. Now, in regard to the boats. Was it the fact that you knew at the time that you left the Jeaunette and were divided up into crews that you would come to open water? — A. It was not a fact known ; not positively. Q. Were not the cutters better boats to transport over the ice than tbe whale boats ! — A. Yes, sir. Q. In your judgment, was it not a wise conclusion, not knowing that you would come to open water, and knowing that you would be a long time upon tbe ice, to ttike the cutter instead of the heavy whale boat ! — A. For ice travel it was ; yes, sir. Q. And with the uncertainty of what you had before you in the future, at the time that you made tbe determination to take that boat, did you not think it was a wise determination ?— A. I considered it so at the time J yes. Q. Was it not very much more difficult to transport the whale boat over the ice, and did it not suffer very much more than the other boats in tbe transportation ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Which was the better equipped and manned and provisioned boat, the boat that Captain De Long had or the boat in which you were ? — A. Well, De Long's boat, I think, as far as I know, had more provisions per man in it than our boat, because he had some provisions that be was carrying for Mr. Chipp ; that is, to the best of my knowledge, he had them. Q. Now, when did you first know that De Long's boat had ever reached land 1 — A. When Kusmah returned to Geeomovialoeke, after going to Bulun, acting as our messenger. Q. And that was what date? — A. I have forgotten the date. (^ It was the 29th of October.— A. Tbe 29th of October. I had for- gotten tbe date. Q. Did you ever discuss among yourselves the possible position of Cbii)p as well as De Long? — A. Yes, sir. Mr. Curtis. I beg your pardon. I do not want to object to anything. Tbe committee will see that the gentleman, so far from following the rule that be endeavored to lay down for me, is going very much further JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 55 111 all directions than I attempted to go. He is going into discussions among themselves. Of course, I dislike to object. I have refrained from doing so up to this time. I do not want to object to a single ques- tion, but 1 do not want you to lead this witness into any discussions be- tween himself and his comrades. Mr. Aenoux. I do not propose to do anything of the kind. You asked him about the discussions of De Long, and I ask him whether Cbipp was discussed. The Chairman. I think it is competent to prove the acts of Mr. Mel- ville's party, Mr. Curtis. Then the gentleman must not object if in the re-exam- ination 1 see fit to take advantage of that rule. Mr. Arnoux. Oh, certainly ; on cross-examination the rule is very dif- ferent. The Chairman. There is an idea prevailing that I do not think ex- ists — only in idea — and that is, that De Long is one party, and Jerome J. Collins another. 1 do not think that there are an 5^ parties here at all. Mr. Arnoux. When I speak of the other party, I mean their boat's crew ; when I speak of De Long's party I include Mr. Collins, and when I speak of Chipp I include those with him. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. Did you ever send out any expedition to endeavor to find out what had become of Chipp, or whether he was alive 1 — A. Yes. Q. When ? — A. After De Long had been found. I think it was about the first of April. Q. Bow, in your judgment, do you not think it was done at the earliest practicable moment ? — A. It was done just as quick as we could get to it. Mr. Curtis. I must object to that. The Witness. 1 thought you were speaking in regard to the search party for Chipp alone. But we had taken a long time in the search for De Long's party, and I say that we made this search for Chipp as soon as possible after we got done with the search for De Long's people. By Mr. Arnoux: Q. You said that, in your judgment, it was as easy for your party to have gone as it was for that refugee to have gone who went as your mes- senger ? — A. No, sir ; I did not say as easy. I said it Avas i)ossible to go. Q. Now, in view of the whole circumstances of the party — in view of the lact that you were in an unknown country and among people speak- ing an unknown language — was it practicable, in your judgment, for you to go instead of sending him to go and come back ? — A. Well, yesj 1 think we could have done it all right enough. Q. You think so now. Did you think so then ? — A. Well, yes 5 be- cause I made the proposition to do it. Q. For all the parties to go '^ — A. Yes. Q. And was it discussed by the others ? — A. Yes. Q. And did the others coincide with your judgment ! — A. The most of the men did, or apart of them. I don't know whether they all did or not. I think some of them didn't have anything to say in regard to it either way. Q. Did you have clothing sufiicient to undertake it, do you think ? — A. We had all the clothing that we came there with. Q. Did you thick that was sufQcient to go on with"? — A, No 5 not sufiicient for comfort. 5S JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. Bid not this man bring back additional supplies for you? — A. He did. Q. Now, in regard to the search for De Long, taking your judgment again in the matter — taking the condition ot the country and your con- dition and all the circumstances under which you were placed — was not that search for De Long made at the earliest practicable moment? — A. Well, as early as we could make it after the moves we had made and the delays. 1 think after it was started that it went along as fast as we could drive it. Q. And before that was it not a matter of doubt and uncertainty as to whether he had landed, and, if so, whether he had not gone ahead of you *? — A. Up to the time we heard from Bulun by Kusmah. Q. Did not some of you think or say in the course of your discussions that it was possible they were better off than you were '? — A. We did. It was all supposition with us though. Q. Did not Melville start immediately for Bulun to ascertain? — A. As soon as he got word from Nindemann ; yes. Q. And as soon as you got word things were done in the most expe- ditious manner possible, were they not ? — A. They were done about as rapidly as we could do them. Q. 1 mean considering all the circumstances under which you were placed. Did not Captain De Long, as matter of fact, maintain the discipline of a manof-war on board the vessel up to the time of its be- ing crushed in the ice ? Mr. Curtis. I do not think this witness is competent to answer that. Q. (Continuing.) As far as you observed ? Mr. Curtis. Well, it is a matter of opinion as to the duty of a supe- rior officer. I object to it. Mr. Arnoux. We have a right to take his opinion on that. We have taken his opinion as to treatment on their side. Mr. Curtis. You have objected most strenuously to anything that looked like an opinion on his part. The Chairman. If he knows enough about the discipline of a man- of-war ^ if be knows the fact he may give an opinion. Mr. Arnoux. I will preface that by another question. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. Hiive you ever, before your cruise on tiiC Jeannette, been on board of a man of- war? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you ever made any previous cruises on a man-of-war? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many ? — A. One. Q. Where was that cruise, and how long? — A. It was on the At- lantic sea-board, oil' the coast of North and South Carolina, and, I think, it was of nine months' duration only. Mr. Arnoux. Now I submit he is competent to answer the other question. The Chairman. I think so. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. Did not Captain De Long, from the time that your vessel left San Francisco until the time that you abandoned her in the ice, maintain the discii)line of a man-of-war, so far as it was possible under the cir- cumstances in which you were i)laced? Mr. BouTELLE. You are making him an expert. I think it is better ^ ask him his impression ? JEANWETTE INQUIRY. 57 Q. Was not tliat j^our impression on board the Jeannette? — A. As far as I know in regard to naval rnles I think they were carried out to a certain extent, but what that extent amounted to I do not know. Q. Did not all the officers perform all the duties they were ordered to perform, so far as yon know ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did not Dr. Ambler attend the sick and work on the roads ! — A. He worked a very little. Q. Could you liave fonnd the way from Geeomovialocke to Bulun without a guide? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you think the rest of the party could '^ — A. The majority of them. I think they all could; yes, sir. Q. Did not Mr. Melville perform all the duty of boss of the road gang ? — A. He did when he was running that gang ; yes. He was the boss of two men that worked on the road. Q. Did he not help to lift the boats over? — A. Very seldom, sir. Q. I simply ask if he did not doit? — A. Not at all times. I have seen him take hold and do it. Q. Did he not do it whenever it was necessary for him to do it? — A. No, sir ; not at all times. Q. Whenever it was necessary for the help to be given, did he not give it ? — A. Not always ; no, sir. Q. Then, of course, you were not able to lift the boats over if it was necessary to have his help to do it. How did you accomj^hsh it ? — A. Sometimes chopped it down in the ice, at other times by hauling the sleds back, and trying it somewhere else in an easier way. Q. Was the change of chopping the ice down or going in another direction done under his orders? — A. Generally, while he was running that gang; yes. Q. Did not Dr. Ambler, and Mr. Melville, and Mr. Collins work on the road on the retreat from the ship? — A. At times; yes, sir. Q. How frequently after this susi)ension of which yon have spoken, did Mr. Collins unburden himself to you on this subject? — A. Well, that depended on circumstances, on the opportunities that he had ; sometimes every evening, sometimes once a week, sometimes twice a week, or just as it happened. Q. Whenever the opportunity offered? — A. Yes, we used to be in conversation in regard to it. Q. Were you more intimate with him than any other man on board the vessel ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you know of his asking any other person on board the vessel to take charge of his papers in case of his death ? — A. No, sir. Q. So that you think he trusted more to you than any other man on board? — A. I think it was because there w^as a warm feeling existing between us as friends. Q. How long after the suspension was it that he told you De Long had taken from him the scientific instruments ? — A. It was the same evening, or the next day, I think. Q. Now, up to that time, had you ever known Captain De Long to make an unkind remark, or to address an unkind word to Mr. Collins ? — A. Only at the time that Q. (Interposing.) No, no ; up to that time, I say. The Witness. Up to the time of his suspension? Mr. Arnoux. Y< s. A. No. sir. Q. Had you ever seen any conduct on the part of Captain De Long that implied the least unkindness to Mr. Collins ? — A. No, sir. 58 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. Had you ever known Captain De Long to permit any other person on board of the vessel to be rude or unkind, or to make an unkind re- mark to Mr. Collins! — A. I never heard it; no, sir. Q. Never heard and never saw it, did you? — A. No, sir; I never saw it aboard the ship. Q. Now, was it at the time of that first conversation that Mr. Collins told you that the orders as to exercise, and tlie other things which you have mentioned in your direct examination, had made it hell on earth to Mr. Collins ! — A. Well, the treatment that he had been receiving — yes. Q. It was in that conversation? — A. I think it was in that conversa- tion. Q. Now, if you had never known of his being treated unkindly by Captain De Long, or with Captain De Long's knowledge, did he explain to you in what way it was that he had been so treated as to make it hell on earth? — A. Well, he said there had been a great many annoy- ances placed in his way. Q. He told you that ? — A. Yes ; by the of&cers in the cabin. Q. Did he specify them ? — A. Why, no; nothing more than saying devilish little annoyances. Q. Did he tell you whether any of those were by the cajitain himself? — A. No, sir. Q. Or by the officers by name? — A. He told me that Mr. Melville was taking every opportunity that he could get hold of to make it unpleas- ant for him, principally by singing Irish songs and telling Irish stories. Q. That was part of the grievances which made it hell on earth ? — A. That was what he said in regard to Mr. Melville. Q. Now, who else made it hell on earth to him ? — A. I don't know, sir. Q. He never specified anything else ? — A. Yes, he did. He specified Dr. Ambler. Q. What did he say Dr. Ambler did to make it hell on earth ? — A. I don't know. He used to speak of it in a general way and I did not pay much attention to it at the time. Q. Did he say whether Dr. Ambler cracked jokes? — A. No; I don't remember what he said in regard to it. Q. Did he state at what times or under what circumstances it was that Mr. Melville sang so feelingly ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you ever hear Mr. Melville sing ? — A. I have; yes, sir. He is a very good singer, too. Q. Did you ever hear him sing Irish songs while on board the boat ? — A. I have ; yes, sir. Q. Was there anything in those songs that you heard that was per- sonal to Mr. Collins? — A. Nothing personal that I know of. Q. Did you ever hear him tell an Irish story? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Can he tell them well?— A. Well, there are one or two he has got that he can tell pretty well as I remember. Q. Where did he tell those stories when you heard them ? — A. Down in the fire-room. Q. Were the men ever with the officers in any entertainments in the evening? — A. Yes, sir; occasionally. Q. Did he ever tell his Irish stories and sing his Irish songs there? — A. I don't remember that he did. I heard him sing one in the deck- house. I don't remember what he sang. Q. As far as Mr. Melville's stock of Irish stories were concerned was there anything in them that was calculated to be personal to Mr. Col- lins? — A. Not that I know of; no, sir. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 59 Q. Did you ever know of Mr. Collins Laving before Ms suspension any broken instruments? — A. No, sir ^ not before the suspension. 1 bave seen once in a while a thermometer that was on the rack that would get broken ; how many I don't know. Q. Did you ever know of his breaking his barometer ? — A. No, sir ; I don't remember it. Q. Did you ever see that he had a broken barometer? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you ever know anything about the way in which he made up his records ? — A. No, sir. Q. You had nothing to do with them 1 — A. No, sir. Q. You were not in a part of the ship where you would see what he was doing when he was on duty 1 — A. No, sir ; only as he came out to make observations. That was all. Q. Now, in regard to the instructions for exercise. Were there any special instructions given in reference to Mr. Collins up to the time of the suspension ? — A. Not that I know of; no, sir. Q. Or were they general instructions which applied to the entire crew ?— A. As far as I know they were general instructions. Q. Did Mr. De Long enforce those instructions against the crew gen- erally as he did against Mr. Collins ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did he make any exception in any way, so far as you observed, in his treatment of Mr. Collins in respect to the orders for exercise more than he did any other member of the crew? — A. No, sir. Q. So that all that concerns that subject, so far as that caused hell on earth, was precisely the same for all on board ? — A. As far as the order for exercise went, so far as I know. Q. Now, did you ever know how Mr. Collins employed his time after he was suspended ? — A. Not when he was aboard the vessel ; no. Q. Did you know of his being away from the vessel ?— A. Yes ; I knew of his going huu ting quite often. Q. And did the other men who were not suspended have as much privilege and freedom during that time as he had ? — A. I think they did ; yes, sir. Q. Did they go hunting as frequently as he did? — A. Some of them oftener probably. Q. Was there anything, so far as you knew, to prevent his going hunting whenever he pleased ? — A. Only in a general way. There were certain hours when we had to be aboard the ship. Any other time between the hours allotted for that business he could go, so far as I know. Q. So far as you know, he could go Avith perfect freedom ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Could any other man during those hours go with the same per- fect freedom as he could, or were they not some hours of the day on duty? — A. The only restriction that I know of that was placed over us was the order of having to ask the man on watch. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. You would not be able to go at the time you were on duty ? — A. No, sir ; not when we were on duty. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. Did not every man when you were required to be on shipboard have certain duties to perform ? — A. Yes ; at certain times of the day. Q. And therefore the officers and men were not able to go with the same freedom that he was, because they had certain duties to i3erform 60 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. which required them to be there diniiio^ the hours of dutj^t — A. They liad vo be there during the hours of duty ; yes, sir. Q. Aud Mr. Colbus did not liave to be there during any hours of duty *? — A. Not after he v? is suspended, that 1 know of. Q. Did he not have a shot-gun ? — A. 1 don't know whether he did or not; I thiuk not, though, of his own. He used a ship's gun. Q. Did he not have one that he generally used ? — A. Yes, there was a gun that was assigned to him in 'the orders when the ship was sent out. Q. Did Mr. ColHns after the suspension have to obey the orders in regard to exercise? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Obedience was required in that respect as before ? — A. I suppose so. The order remained the same as far as I know, aud he had to com- ply with it or did comply with it. Q. Was there, to your knowledge, except this order of suspension, any order whatever that was more oppressive upon Mr. Collins than u])on any other member of the crew ? — A. Nothing except this order to quit work. Q. Except his suspension ^. — A. No, sir; not that 1 know of. Q. And from the beginning to the end of the time that he was on board the vessel that was so, was it not? — A. I think so ; yes, sir. Q. Did any of the scientific instruments, to your knowledge, belong to Mr. Collins as his personal property ? — A. I don't know whether they did or not. Q. Did you ever hear him claim that any of them belonged to him as his ])ersoual property ? — A. I never did. Q. When he spoke of the scientific instruments being taken from him did he not either admit or imply in the conversation with you that those instruments which he complained of as being taken from him belonged to the vessel! — A. I think he said they belonged to the expedition, or I don't know whether he said anything in regard to it at all. Q. Now, did he, before his suspension, do any more in the way of tak- ing observations than the other officers ? — A. I think he did in the weather observations. Q. Do you know that he did of your own knowledge? — A. I used to see him out from 12 o'clock noon until 3 o'clock in the morning. That is, he would not be out of the ship all the time, but he used to go out to take an observation once an hour or once in two hours. Q. Did not the other officers also take observations? — A. Some of them, yes; not all them. Q. Did not some of the officers take as many and as frequent obser- vations as did Mr. Collins, so far as you know? — A. Not as far as I know, no. I don't think thej did, any of them, because it was divided between Mr. Melville and the doctor and Mr. Chipp. Mr. CuiiTis. Do you claim that the Government furnished these in- struments ? Mr. Arnottx. I claim Collins did not own a thing. I have nothing to say about it except they did not belong to Mr. Collins, and that he had no ownership or authority over them. Q. (Resuming.) Did not ail the officers except Mr. Newcomb take observations ? — A. At different timers, I think they did. Q. Do you know of Mr. Newcond)'s taking any ? — A. No, sir; I never saw him taking any. Q. Did not Captain De Long from the beginning of the cruise up to the time of the destruction of the vessel take observations? — A. I do not know whether he took any weather observations at first or not, but I think he did. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 61 By. Mr. Boutelle : Q. What observations do you refer to ? — A. The reading of the ther- mometers and anemometers. Q. Any observations of the soundings "1 — A. No ; because that was done by Mr. Dauenhower at first. I don't know but the captain used to take observations himself. By Mr. Curtis : Q. When he was suspended did not the other officers continue to dis- charge all the duties that devolved upon the expedition!— A. As far as I know, yes. Q. And was there any los« to the expedition scientifically, so far as you know, by the suspension of Mr. Collins '? Mr. Arnoux. Objected to. That is ridiculous. By Mr. CuRTiS : Q. Then I will vary the form of the question, and I will ask were any observations omitted, so far as you know, by the other officers by reason of the suspension of Mr. Collins? — A. I think the readings were not taken as often the last year as they were the first year. Q. Were they any less frequently taken by reason of the suspension of Mr. Collins, to your knowledge ? — A. I don't know the reason that they were not taken, sir. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. Do you know that they were taken less frequently ? — A. Yes, sir. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. You mean by that up to the time of the abandoning of the ves- sel*? — A. Yes; that the readings of the anemometer and thermometer were not taken as often. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. After you left the ship "? — A. No, no ; the last year or during the latter part of our stay in the ice. But the cause of our not doing so I do not know. By Mr. Curtis : Q. (Submitting a paper to witness.) Did you write that letter?- — A. Yes, sir. Q. Is there anything in that letter you wish to correct now before it is offered ! — A. No, sir. Mr. Curtis. I will read it. Mr. Arnoux. Let me see it. [After examining the letter.] I do not think that that is admissible. Mr. Curtis (reading) : Sir: In answer to your inquiry, I, for one, deem it absolutely necessary that an in- vestigation be made by Congress into the Jeannette expedition in order to do justice to the liAdng and the dead. Yours, truly, J. H. BARTLETT. I offer that as an exhibit. The Chairman. I do not think this letter proves any fact at all. It is a matter of opinion as to whether a certain thing ought or ought not to be done. By Mr. Curtis : Q. I presume tliere are a great many things you do not know of your own knowledge 1 — A. If there were not •! should know everything. 62 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. Your time has been taken up for the last hour in questioning you about things that 3^ou did not know of your own knowledge or that you did know of your own knowledge. To illustrate, do you know of your own knowledge that President Arthur is in the city to-day 1 — A. No, sir. Q. As I said most of your time on the cross-examination has been consumed in askiug you about things that you did not know of your own knowledge, what we lawyers call negative evidence. Now, you said something in speaking of your testimony before the Board of Inquiry about certain influences that operated at that time. What did you mean by that ? — A. Why I think it is the influence that the naval au- thorities have over enlisted men in the Navy. Q. In what way was it demonstrated there ? — A. Nothing more than this : As there had been no evidence given during the investigation by any one that tended to bring out the whole of it from the bottom, I did not feel like going to work, being the last man to testify, to start it up myself. Q. Your explanation is not quite clear to me. Was anything said to you by any gentleman connected with the Navy Department about the inquiry 1 — A. No, sir. Q. Were you then in the employ of the Government ? — A. YeSj sir. Q. Are you now ? — A. No, sir. Q. ])o you expect to be? — A. No, sir. Q. The questions that were put to you were written out, were they not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Dr. Collins was not there ? — A. No, sir. Q. There was no one there in particular for him ? — A. The judge-ad- vocate read the questions that he wished to ask me. Q. When you said that you did not consider at that time and do not consider to day the use of the oath on the part of Captain De Long as necessarily a word of unkindness, the explanation you gave to Judge Arnoux is the one that you give me, is it^ — A. Yesj I do not think it was necessarily showing any particular Q. (Interposing.) Your attention was not i)articularly called to that act by anybody ? — A. No ; nobody. Q. Your attention during the examination by the Board of Inquiry was not directed by anybody in the interest of Dr. Collins to any de- tails ? — A. No, sir. Q. You were simply asked written questions by the Judge- Advocate General and you ansv/ered them in a general way ; is not that it ! — A. Yes, sir. Q. You have not testified to-day that you saw any other occurrence except the one you testified to in the examination-in-chief, have you ? — A. No, sir. Q. And what you testified then you testify now, and it is the truth, is it not ? — A. I think it is. Q. So that when you stated before the Boardof Inquiry that jou never heard an unkind word spol^en by De Long you meant to say that your mind was not particularly called to that subject, and that you did not at all times consider an oath on the part of a seamen as a word of unkindness ; is that it ? — A. Oh, no ; I don't consider it so by any means. Q. Now, you could have gone as well as Kusmali at the time he de- parted ? — A. Yes ; I could have gone as well. Q. And your party could have gone as well, could it notf — A. I don't think they could have gone as well, because we did not have the ready appliances. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 63 Q. But those in health could have gone as well as you, could they not *? — A. They could have gone ; yes, sir. Q. And while you say that you actually started in the search for De Long, and his aid was not practicable, still you did not change your statement that you made a great many unaccountable delays and halts; that you did not use all your energies before you started? The Witness. To go to Bulun, do you mean? Mr. OuRTis. At the time you went in search of De Long. A. There was a search made Q. (Interposing.) You said that at the time you went in search of De Long it was not practicable to find him in time? — A. Yes ; at the time we actually started. Q. And you also said in your examination-in-chief that if you had taken proper steps and used proper energy before that time you might have saved him? — A. I said that if we had known exactly where he was it would have been possible. Q. Did you not say if you had not made these delays the chance would have been much greater ?— A. I think if our party had all gone to Bulun, or some of them, when Kusmah went, the possibility would have been greater of course. Q. i^ow, you do not pretend to have been with De Long every time he met Collins, do you ? — A. No, sir ; I do not. Q. You do not pretend to have been with Collins every time he met De Long, do you? — A. I do not, sir. Q. And so far as the possibilities go there may have been a thousand indignities pass and you not know any of them ? — A. Exactly. Q. And all these random negative questions that have been shot at you, of course, you cannot answer; you do not know what takes place between one man and another when they are out of your sight?— A. Ko, sir. Q. And so far as Collins's story to you is concerned of the treatment received from De Long, so far as your own knowledge is concerned, it may have been entirely true ? — A. Yes. Q. You looked on Collins as an honorable man ? — A. I did, sir. Q. You looked on him as a gentleman of truth and veracity ? — A. I did. Q. You discovered no signs of insanity about him ? — A. Ko, sir. Q. You did not dream that a man of his mental condition and of his social condition in life would make unjust charges and complaints against anybody, did you? — A. I did not, sir. Q. Did you not then believe, and do you not now believe, that in all the statements or charges he made he told the truth ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you not a friend of De Long's ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And were you not a friend of Collins ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You have never given much attention to the weather, have you ? — A. Ko, sir. Q. You concede that Professor Wiggins is possibly your superior in that regard ? — A. He might be in some respects. Q. Have you ever given auy extensive portion of your time to the manufacture of instruments used in observiug the weather ? — A. Ko, sir. Q. And was it not one source of complaint on the part of Mr. Collins that it was the jealousy of the naval element in the expedition that caused the instruments to be taken from him ; that they wanted to de- 64 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. piive him of the credit and the glory of the scientilic part of the expe- dition ; did he not say that to you ? Mr. Arnoux. I submit that is not a fair examination, because he has been asked to tell what was said. The Chairman. I think it might be going a little too far to give his opinion as to the gfffund of jealousy. We will let the fact go in that the instruments were taken away. Mr. BouTELLE. You mean to ask him whether Mr. Collins told him that? Mr. Curtis. Yes. Mr. BouTELLE. I should not object to it. Mr. Curtis. I withdraw it. Q. (Resuming.) \^ou do not undertake to tell us who furnished these instruments, or to whom they belonged! — A. No, sirj I said I consid- ered they belonged to the expedition. "^ Q. Have you any knowledge on that subject ! — A. No, sir. Q. Have you any knowledge who furnished them ? — A. No, sir. Q. Have you any knowledge whose money paid for them? — A. No, sir. Q. Have you any knowledge who they belonged to? — A. No, sir. Q. Then you do not consider that your opinion on that subject is worth much, do you? — A. No, sir. Q. Now, Mr. Arnoux asked yoii if Mr. Collins did not become a pas- senger. Mr. Collins did everything in his power to aid his brethren in distress at all times, and on all occasions, and always expressed a will- ingness to do so, did he not ? — A. Always exi)ressed a willingness to do so ; yes. Q. And did he not sui)pl3^ many with clothing and necessaries ? — A. He did, sir; many of them. Q. So, in point of fact, to weary you no longer, all these things, facts, and circumstances might have occurred ; Collius's story to you might have been perfectly true, and still you might not have been present to have seen or observed it ? — A. Yes ; there was plenty of chance for that. Q. I suppose that there were hundreds of instances in the lives of the sailors on that expedition that you knew nothing about? — A. Yes, sir; many of them. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. Do I understand you to say that there is some influence of the Navy Department brought to bear ui^on enlisted men who appear as witnesses before boards of inquiry, or courts of inquiry, which would tend to prevent them from testifying to the truth? — A. I think there is a feeling among the men to that effect. Q. That the Department desires them to testify falsely? — A. No, sir; but I think there is a feeling of intimidation that is brought over the men. Q. In what respect? — A. Because they are under that influence of the Navy Department. Q. Intimidated to do what ? — A. That they don't like to bring out numy things that they would otherwise bring out. Q. Has that been your experience in naval courts-martial and boards? — A. I never was before but one, sir. Q. What interest would the Navy Department have in this case to intimidate a witness? — A. I don't know, as they w^ould have any. I don't know as they did intimidate them. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 65 Q. Did 3^011 feel intimidated wheu you were before that board? — A. I felt like this: that did I say anythiDg in relation to this matter it might put me in position to lose v/hat pay was coming to me, which God knows was small enough. Q. In what way could you lose your pay? — A. By court-martial. I came home under arrest. Q. In other words, you believed if you testified to the truth and nothing bnt tlie truth, it would imperil your payment? — A. I believe more would have come out if the men had all been discharged before being placed on the stand. Q. JSIow, what particular incident occurred which induced you to be- lieve that the Navy Department, or any officer of the Navj , was engaged in using means to intimidate you ? — A. I don't know that there was any used. I haven't made the statement that there was any used. Q. I understood you to say that the reason why your statements be- fore the Board of Inquiry and to-day were somewhat inharmonious was due to the fiict that an influence was brought to bear upon you as en- listed men. Now, that is a very serious charge against the Navy De- partment, which 1 want to know something more about, and if you can throw any light upon the subject I should be glad of it. — A. I cannot, any more than my i^ersonal feeling at the time. I did not feel like bring- ing out anything further than was necessary or than I was obliged to. Q. You say you were under arrest at the time? — A. Yes, sir. It was not arrest; it was prisoner at large, 1 believe. Q. On what ground ? — A. On an order from Lieut. Giles B. Harber. Q. For what offense? — A. Differences between Mr. Hunt and myself. Q. Why did the fact of your being under arrest convince you that it was necessary for you to modify your statements before this Board of Inquiry ? Who did you think was interested in your testifying in any particular way ? — A. I don't know that any one was in particular; it was only in a general way that I spoke of it. Q. In what way were you influenced ? — A. That I did not tell any facts or things that I knew in connection with this expedition outside of the bare questions I was asked, and made my answers a« short as possible, Q. That does not seem to go to the point of any influence brought to bear upon you by the Department. Did any officer of the Navy ai3proach you to influence you in your testimony? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you have any intimations from any person connected with the Naval Department or naval service that it would be vs^ell for you to testify in a certain way, or ill for you if you testified in another way? — A. No, sir; I did not. The Chairman. There was one matter that I wish to refer to that was ruled out. I do not say that I have changed ray opinion, but as this witness will be dispensed with, I think it would be proper to allow him to answer the question, keeping it out of the record and then let the full committee say whether it is admissible, and that was with reference to what Lieutenant Danenhower said with reference to having Lieutenant De Long broken. By Mr. Curtis: Q. Did you hear Lieutenant Danenhower say anything in reference to Captain De Long about having him broken when he came back if Presi- dent Grant was President? — A. Yes. Q. What did he say on that subject? — A. He said he did not consider he had been well treated by De Long; that he had been ill used and very unjustly treated by him and that when we returned home if Grant was, 5 J Q* 66 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. President he thought he could bring influence enough to have him broke from the Navy. By Mr. Arnoux: Q. When was that*? — A. It was during the retreat on the ice. Adjourned. I Washington, D. C, Monday, April 7, 1884. The subcommittee met at 10.30 a. m., Messrs. Buchanan andBoutelle being present ; also counsel on either side. Mr. Curtis (submitting a paper). If the committee please, here is a list of other witnesses that we desire subpoenaed between the adjourn- ment of to-day and the next day of hearing if practicable. I under- stand from Judge Arnoux that he will ask the committee to adjourn over a day or two to enable him to go to New York to attend to some very important business. Mr. Arnoux. It may be so ; I can tell better this afternoon. I think very likely if we find that this investigation is going to last through the week I will ask the committee to adjourn over till Wednesday. I will know better this afternoon. Mr. Curtis. Before the examination proceeds I would like to call the attention of the committee to the fact that on Saturday we made appli- cation for the original journal of De Long to be produced. I would ask if that has been produced. Mr. Arnoux. Did you want it this morning ? Mr. Curtis. We would like to have it as soon as possible. Mr. Arnoux. I forgot to speak to Mrs. De Long this morning, and it is probably my oversight that it is not here. I did not know that you would want it to-day. Mr. Curtis. It really should be here at all times, because it is a very important factor in the evidence. Mr. BouTELLE. It would be well to have it with you each day. Mr. Arnoux. I did not understand that it was wanted here to-day or I would have brought it. James H. Bartlett resumed the stand, and his examination was continued, as follows : By Mr. Arnoux : Question. Were you the last man to testify before the Court of In- quiry ? — Answer. The last man among the survivors ; yes, sir. Q. Had any enlisted men, so far as you know, testified before that court before you had ? — A. I did not hear any testify. Q. Now, at or before the time that you commenced to give your tes- timony, did you have any conversation with any of the enlisted men in regard to their testimony ^ — A. Only in a general way. Q. Well, did you of any kind about what they had to testify to or the nature of their evidence? — A. I think I had; yes. Q. Will you name the ones you had conversation with ? — A. I had conversation with Leach, Lauterbach, and Manson. Q. Had you talked with those three before you went on the stand yourself to testify? — A. Not in particular — well, I liad a general con- versation with them about it. Mr. Boutelle. Mr. Arnoux, will you suspend one moment ? Judge Curtis, have you any knowledge about these witnesses, as to whether JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 67 they would be willing to come willingly? If so^ we can subpoena them by telegraph. Mr. Curtis. They will all come willingly. Mr. BouTELLE. That will facilitate matters. Mr. Curtis. I also ask that Mr. I^ewcomb be telegraphed to bring his records with him. I think that Mr. Newcomb had better be subpoe- naed with the records. Mr. BouTELLE. What records do you indicate ? Mr. Curtis. His own records. Mr. BouTELLE. Records of the expedition'? Mr. Curtis. Yes -, in his possession. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. (Resuming.) Before you were called and sworn as a witness before the Court of Inquiry did either Mr. Leach, Mr. Lauterbach, or Mr. Man- son tell you that there was an influence of the Navy Department brought to bear upon enlisted men who should appear as witnesses before Boards of Inquiry or Courts of Inquiry, that would prevent their testifying to the truth ? — A. No, sir j they did not. Q. Neither one 1 — A. None of them. Q. You said, in answer to a question put to you by Mr. Boutelle, that you thought there was a feeling among the men to that effect. How did you arrive at that impression, if the men did not so tell you ? — A. It was my opinion, sir. Q. Your opinion ? — A. Yes -, it was my thoughts, I said. Q. And if I understand you now, it was not based upon any facts ? — A. No, sir; I stated the other day that it was not. Q. I did not so understand you. Now, did the feeling that you had, or the belief that you had, that there was a feeling among these men to that effect influence your testimony before the Court of Inquiry? — A. Not the feeling that I believed existed between them. It was only my own feeling that Influenced me. Q. That was alH— A. Yes, sir. Q. When you swore before the Court of Inquiry were you not sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth ?— A I was ; yes, sir. Q. Did you, at the time you took that oath, deem it binding upon your conscience ? — A. I did, sir. Q. What was the reason that you were a i)risoner at large at that time ? — A. It was, I believe, because it was considered that I had been insubordinate. It was so claimed. Q. How much wages was there due to you at that time ? — A. My wages from 1879 till 1883, at $30 per month. Q. If that money had been paid to you before you were called as a witness before the Court of Inquiry, you would have testified differently from what you did? — A. I think I should have given testimony at greater length than I did then. Q. Would you in what you did testify to have testified any differently from what you did? — A. I don't know as I should. Q. Are you under any restraint now? — A. Not that I know of, sir. Q. Have you any feeling that there is any desire in this inquiry to limit you or to affect your statements in any way? — A. I think not, sir. Q. What did you understand the Court of Inquiry before which you testified was convened for ?— -A. To inquire into the loss of the Jean- nette. Q. What fact connected with the loss of that steamer did you inten- 68 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. tionally suppress? — A. IsTot any in connection witli the loss of tlie steamer, sir. Q. Was the iufliieuce that prevented you from testifying to the truth exerted in having your testimony suppressed by giving fiilse evidence, or giving insufficient evidence? — A. Giving insufficient evidence, sir. Q. Did not the fact that you had taken the oath which you did, and that it was binding upon your conscience, overcome any feeling of in- timidation ? — A. I don't know as 1 get the meaning of that question exactly. Mr. Curtis. Any words you do not understand say so frankly. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. (Resuming.) Did not the fact that you had taken the oath that you did and that it was binding upon your conscience overcome any in- timidation ? — A. Well, I don't know with regard to that fact whether it did or not. Q. What fact connected with or bearing upon the loss of the Jean- nette did ;\ on express before tliat Court of Inquiry ? — A. 1 did not ex- press any, because I was not asked any in regard to it. Q. Did you know what testimony had previously been given on the subject ? — A. I did not, sir; had never read it, nor never had heard the general testimony of them j none of them had given me an account of their testimony in full. Q. Did you not know that every surviving officer and most of the surviving men had been examined before you were examined ? — A. I had a belief that they all had been examined. Q. I repeat, then, the question. I ask you now to tell to this commit- tee any fact bearing upou the loss of tlie Jeannette which you then suppressed ? — A. Well, there were several questions that 1 would have answered if they had been asked me. Q. Tell the committee now what there is that was material to that Inquiry that you failed to state for any reason whatever. — A. Well, there were the questions that Mr. Collins sent me that were objected to. Q. Are those all ? — A. I don't know whether they are or not ; I should have to read my testimony over to find out ; I think I have never read my own testimony clear through. Q. Was it not read to you after it was taken down, and did you not pronounce It to be correct? — A. Yes, sir ; it was read to me. Q. Now, I ask you again, can you state to this committee any fact that is material that you suppressed when before the Court of Inquiry as a witness? — A. Not any particular one; not just now ; no, sir. Q. Can you state any general one? — A. Yes; those by Mr. Collins. Q. Were those all ? — A. Well, I don't know, in fact, whether they w^ere or not. Q. Do you know of any valuable testimony that the Court of Inquiry refused to admit or allow ? — A. I think there was a great deal of testi- mony they could have gotten had they asked the questions. Q. That is not the point. I ask you do you know of any valuable testimony that the Court of Inquiry refused to admit or allow ? — A. I do not, only in regard to the Collins matter. Q. And all that you imagined was valuable in respect to the Collins matter you have already stated before this committee, have you not ? — A. I don't know whether I have stated all of it or not yet. Q. Have you endeavored to tell all you know this time ? — A. All that I could think of at present. Q. Do you imagine that there is anything that you have not thought JEANNETTE INQUIRY. G9 of that bears upon this subject! — A. I made a statement on Saturday that I had some short notes that I had sent for that have not arrived yet, and they might refresh my memory, because I have not read them since I came home; have not looked at them, in fact. Q. Was auy question put to you and ruled out that would, in your opinion, have brought out the true history of the expedition? — A. It might have brought out more of it. Q. No, no; I say was there any question that related to the true his- tory of the expedition that you think w^as excluded by the Court of Inquiry 1—A. Well, I should want those questions read before 1 am able to answer that, I guess. Q. How many questions were ruled out that were put to you ! — A. I cannot tell you, sir. Q. Have you any recollection ! — A. I think there were four or five or six, or something like that. Q. And do you think that those four or five or six questions were asked in regard to anything that was in any way material to the loss of the ship? — A. I don't know as they were material to the loss of the ves- sel, particularly. Q. And did you not understand that that was the only inquiry that the court was investigating ? —A. No, sir. Q. What further did you understand the court w^as to inquire about ? — A. I understood it was a court to inquire into the loss of the vessel and the result of the expedition. ^ Q. Did those four or five questions put to you and excluded have any effect upon the result of the expedition ! — A. I don't thick the questions had any result upon the exi)edition, without they would have thrown some light upon the expedition or led to throwing some light upon it. Q. And now you think you have furnished that light by the testimony that you gave on Saturday? — A. Not altogether; no, sir. Q. You do not ? — A. No, sir ; not altogether. Q. When you testified before the Court of Inquiry, were you afraid of the persecution of the Naval Department ? — A. To a certain extent, yes. Q. To what extent ? — A. Well, I don't know about that. If I said anything that was injurious about them — naval officers are quite re- sentful; I have always found them so — I thought they would do all they could to bring out the points where I had been insubordinate. Q. And you have not been under such intimidation at this time, and you have told all those points so far as you recollect, have you not"? — A. So far as I recollect them, yes. Mr. BouTELLE. The witness seems to qualify his answers a little. I would like to ask him if he has in his mind now any fact which he would desire to have brought out before this committee, which has not been stated before? The Witness. Any particular fact. Mr. Boutelle. Any fact. The Witness. What do you mean ? Do you want fact or hearsay ? Mr. Boutelle. I do not want anything. I ask you if there is any fact which you desire to bring to the attention of this committee. The Witness. I think there will be some when I get my notes and look them over. Mr. Boutelle. You are not sure? The Witness. I am not prepared to-day. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. Did you tell the truth in answer to the questions put to you by 70 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. the Court of Inquiry or by tlie one who interrogated you ? — A. As far as I remembered it at that time. Q. When you made your answers there did you make any of them falsely ? — A. Not intentionally ; no, sir. Q. Is there any answer that you made there that you wish to add aDythin.2i: to? — A. Not that I know of. Q. Now I will ask you whether these three questions and answers are correct : In your opinion was everything done that was possible for the rescue of De Long's I)arty ? — A. Yqs, sir. A. After the search was started ; yes, sir. Q. Did you qualify that answer in such a way ! — A. I don't know whether I did or not, sir. I don't remember at present. Q. (reading :) If an earlier and more urgent attempt was made for his relief in the beginning what would have been the chances? — A. I think there were no chances to assist him. Is that answer true in your opinion ? — A. Well, I don't know whether it is or not. Q. Did you believe the answer to be true at the time you made it ? — A. I thought that that was the case, yes. Q. Have you any better opinion to-day than you had at the time you answered that question as you did answer it before the Court of In- quiry ? — A. I have had a greater length of time to look the thing over and look up the result of it. Q. But I say have you any better opinion ? — A. I don't think I have, in fact. Q. How long was it after the search when you testified before the Court of Inquiry ? The Witness. After which search do you mean ? Mr. Ae-noux. The search for De Long. A. It was a year, pretty near, I think. Q. And had you an opportunity during that year to think on this matter ! — A. I had been quite busy during that year the most of the time. Q. But did you have any opportunity, I say, to think of it ?— A. Some j yes, sir. Q. (Reading:) If Lieutenant Danenhower had been permitted to go on his search and was aided, in your opinion could De Long's party have been saved? — A. No, sir. A. Not at the time he started his search ; no, sir. Q. Now, then, in regard to the three answers that you gave to those three questions, do you desire now to qualify them or to state that any part of the answers were not true at the time of your giving them ? — A. No, I do not. I think those are all right. Q. Now, in regard to some of these matters which are contained in this petition, I would like to ask you first, do you know any facts reflect- ing upon the honor of the ofiicers in the United States service connected with the Jeannette expedition, and if so, name the officers ? The Witness. What is that? Ask it again. Q. Do you know any fact reflecting upon the honor of the officers of the United States service connected with the Jeannette expedition, and if so, name the officers'? — A. Well, I don't know what you would con- sider reflecting upon the honor of an officer. Q. I ask you. It is not what I consider. — A. What do you mean ? In an official capacity ? JEANNETTE INQUIRY 71 Q. Upon the honor of any of&cer of that expedition *? — A. In an official capacity ^ Q. I do not limit it in any way. Mr. Curtis. He has the right to know the intent of the question. Mr. Arnoux. I say anything I A. Yes, sir. Q. ISTame them. — A. Drunkenness Q. (Interposing.) No, no; name the officers. I do not ask you to name the thing. — A. Well, Mr. Melville, Mr. Chipp — I guess all of them, in fact. Q. ISTame each one? — A. Mr. Danenhower and Dr. Ambler. That is as far as I guess I will go. Q. Do you know of any fact reflecting upon the humanity of any of the officers of that service connected with that expedition ; and, if so, name the c^fficers ? — A. I think there were points of humanity demonstrated by all of them. Q. 'No, no. I ask you to name any of the officers. Go right to them. The Witness. Acts of humanity that I know of? Mr. BOUTELLE. Inhumanity. Mr. Curtis. He means by that, acts of cruelty. Mr. Arnoux. He knows what I mean as well as you do. A. 1 don't know as I do, sir. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. Do you know of any facts reflecting upon the conduct of the sur- viving members of the expedition besides the officers ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. W^ho ? — A. Myself, Manson, Mndemann, Wilson, Lauterback, Ani- guin — in fact all of the surviving members. Mr. BouTELLE. I think that there may be some little vagueness in the mind of the witness about the scope of this question. I would put it a little more plainly. Mr. Arnoux. I am coming down to it closely. Mr. BouTELLE. We do not want to have the witness testify without understanding what he is testifying to. Mr. Curtis. Evidently he does not understand some of the words used by the counsel. The Chairman (to the witness). Anything you do not understand say so. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. In regard to the officers that you have named, do you know any fact that reflects upon their honor as officers of that expedition? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did any of those facts in any way aifect the ultimate result of the expedition? — A. I don't know that they did, sir. Q. State generally what you considered facts that reflected upon the honor of the officers — A. Well, in sejtting a bad example to the people that were under them, to a certain extent, and for intoxication, also. Q. Those are the things. Now, do you mean that you have known every one of the officers that you have named to be guilty of intoxica- tion? — A. Yes, sir. Q. During that expedition ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Is it considered in the Navy a matter that reflects upon the honor of an officer that he sets a bad example to the men ? — A. I understand that it is, sir ; as far as I know, it is. Q. When did your acquaintance with Mr. Collins first commence ? — A. In San Francisco, in 1879. 72 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. Wlieu did your intimacy with him begin ? — A. Tlie first winter that w^e were in the ice — the winter of 1879 and 1880, say. Q. Was it before or after the time he Avas suspended from duty? — A. It commenced a long time before, sir. Q. Did he at any time before his suspension comphdn to you of any- thing that had occurred in the officers' room ? — A. Yes, sir. ic^. How frequently before he was suspended did he make sucli com- plaint! — A. Well, I can't tell you how i'requently, because 1 don't re- member. Q. Well, as nearly as you recollect '^ — A. Well, occasionally, we will say once a week, perhaps, I would have a long conversation with him, or twice a week. Q. Where did you have these conversations with him? — A. Some- times in the fire-room, sometimes on the ice. Q. When you had the conversations with him in the fire-room were you on duty? — A. Yes. Q. And he came there? — A. Yes. Q. And did he converse with you generally at that time for one or two hours? — A. Sometimes; yes, sir. Q. Did any of the other officers have the same intimacy with you? — A. No that I know of; no, sir. Q. You would know, would you not? — -A. I don't think they did. Q. Is it not a part of the etiquette of the Navy for those connected with the officers not to have intimacies Avith the men? — A. I am not well enough acquainted with the rules of the Navy to know, sir. Q. Did 3^ou ever have anj^ officers in the Navy as intimate with you as Mr. Collins Avas while you Avere on duty on shipboard? — A. AYell, since I have become a man I was never on board of a NaA-y ship before, or a ship that was under the NaA^y Department. Q. Without regard to whether you were a man or a boy? — A. When I was a boy I was. Q. I ask you did you ever have any officers show the same dego^e of intimacy with you that Mr. Collins did? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you evo.T, at any other time, have any officer who came and repeated to you the conversations that took place in the ward-room ? — A. To a certain extent, yes, sir. Q. To the extent that Mr. Collins did? — A. He ne\^er repeated the conversations only in regard to himself. Q. Well, in regard to themselves? — A. No, sir; I don't think I did. Q. I understood you to say that he repeated to you the con\'ersation he had Avith Lieutenant De Long, Avhen De Long told him it Avas not compatible with the dignity of the mess-room to he too intimate Avith the men ?— A. lie did talk Avith me about it ; yes, sir. Q. He repeated that to you, did he not ? — A. Well, I don't kuoAv whether he repeated the couA^ersation to me that he had Avith De Long in full, but in a general Avay. Q. It Avas not the question whether he repeated it in full or not. He repeated that much of the conversation to you, did he? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you ever before or since have an officer, when you Avere ou duty in a United States vessel, do the same thing ? — A, I ncA'er did ; no, gir. Q. Did you ever see Mr. Collins Avrite after he told you that he had been deprived of Avriting materials? — A. I never did, sir. Q. Di.d you cA^er know of his writing? — A. I never did, sir. Q. When Aras it that he told you that he was deprived of writing ma- JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 73 terials? — A. I can't just name the time, but it was after lie was sus- I^ended, I tliink. Q. How long afterwards? — A. I don't know, sir. My memory does not serve me at present. Q. A month or two months ? — A. I can't tell you whether it Avas a month or two months. Q. Or six months or a year ! — A. I think it was less than six months. Q. Did you testify on Saturday that lie told you on the ice that he had a comi^lete condensed journal up to that time that he talked to you! — A. He said that he had a complete condensed record of the trip. Q. Of all thnt had taken place 1 — A, Yes, sir. Q. Did you believe if? — A. I had no right to disbelieve him, sir. Q. Did not that lead you to conclude that he must have had writing materials furnished to him after the time he said he had been deprived of them ? — A. I don't know. I didn't pay any attention to it. Q. I ask you, did not that lead you to conclude that! — A. Not neces- sarily, because he could have had them in disobedience to orders, I think. Q. And do you think that he would have taken writing materials right straight along, week after week and month after month, in disobe- dience to orders ? — A. He might have had these in his possession when the orders were given to him. Q. Then there was no cruelty in telling him not to have writing ma- terials, so far as you know ! — A. Not as far as I know personally, sir. Q. In regard to the water that you s])oke of his being forbidden to take 5 when did that conversation take place! — A. I think that was be- fore he Avas suspended. Q. Where did you get your drinking water at that time ? — A. Out of the fire-room, sir. Q. How! — A. By distilling the salt water. Q. Under whose care was the distilling of the water done! — A. Prin- cipally the work was carried out under my care, through Mr. Melville, who was in charge, of course. Q. Did not Mr. Melville every day make a scientific examination of the water to see if there was any salt in it? — A. I don't think that Mr. Melville did; 1 don't know. There was such a test, I believe, made nearly every day. Q. And in case there was any salt in the water, was not the water thrown away! — A. Sometimes, if it was too salty. There were a very few times that it was thrown away, that I remember. Q. Did any of the crew on board that vessel, or any of the officers on board the vessel, have scurvy ! — A. Not to my positive knowledge ; no, sir. Q. Now, do you know in general what is the cause of scurvy ! — A. Only what I have read. Q. Well, what is that! — A. I think it is from eating poor food and too much inaction. Q. And too much salt food and not enough fresh food, is it not! — A. Well, I understand, from what I know, that it is worse to take the salt in water than in food ; that it is not so much salt food as it is salt water. Q. And was it not, therefore, a matter of wise precaution, in your judgment, that no man should go into the fire-room and get the water to make the tea with, or for any other purpose, until it had been tested to ascertain whether that water was too salty to use or not ! — A. I don't think it was ; no. Q. You do not think it was wise to take that precaution ! — A . Well, I think it would be in a general way, but not to limit it too std'ongly . 74 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. It was no more strongly limited in regard to Mr. Collins than it was to any other man on board the boat, was it ? — A. Yes ; because there were several of them that used to take the water whenever they chose. Q. Do you mean that there was a rule more stringent in regard to Mr. Collins than in regard to anybody else '? — A. The whole engineer's department used to drink it. Q. Of course the engineer's department was not under supervision. I ask you whether the officers were under any less orders than Mr. Collins was? — A. There used to be water taken for the officers' use. Q. I ask if there was any different order in regard to Mr. Collins than there was in regard to any other officer'?— A. I knew of no order restricting any other officer or any other person from coming to the fire- room. Q. And did you know of any other order ? — A. I knew of no other order. Q. Only in regard to Mr. Collins ? — A. Onl}^ in regard to Mr. Collins. Q. Did he not come to the fire-room just as much as he did before? — A. He used to come to the hatch and pass his cup down to have us make him a cup of tea. Q. Just the same as before ? — A. But he did not come down into the fire-room. Q. He did not come to the fire-room and have his conversations with you just as frequently as he did before! — A. He did not, sir. Q. Then your intimacy did not continue daring the whole time you were on the ship ? — A. Not to such an extent as it had, because we did not have the opportunities. Q. Did you make any such limitation when you testified on Satur- day I — A. I don't know. Q. Did you not say that your intimacy with him continued during the whole time? — A. It did continue. Q. But did you not say it continued throughout the whole time? — A. I did, I think. Q. Now so far as you know, was Mr. Collins as intimate with any other person on board the vessel as he was with you ? — A. Yes j I think he was. Q. With whom? — A. He was just as intimate with Mr. Newcomb. Q. In what department was Mr. Newcomb? — A. Well, we used to call him the bug hunter. Mr. BouTELLE. The entomologist, I suppose. The Witness. He was the naturalist. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. Did you see him in as intimate conversation with Mr. Newcomb as you did with yourself? — A. Yes. Q. As frequently? — A. Yes; more frequently. Q. Were you in company with them ? — A. Sometimes, yes. Q. And were they both then with you in the fire-room? — A. No, sir; this was on the ice. Q. That is, when you went to take the two hours' exercise ? — A. Not always ; sometimes when we were hunting. Q. When did you first hear Mr. Collins complain about the instru- ments being taken from him? — A. Well, I couldn't state. Q. Was it that night when you believed him to have been suspended ? — A. I think it was before that when he first commenced telling me about it. Q. How long before ? — A. I don't know. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 75 Q. Did he state what instruments had been taken from him? — A. ^o-, he said they used to take first one and then another from him. Q. Did he saj^ what one they took first ? — A. I don't know whether he did or not ; I don't remember. Q. How long was it before he was suspended that you first heard from Mr. Collins that any instrument had been taken from him ? — A. I can't tell you how long it was. Q. As near as you can fix it. — A. Well, it would be inipossible for me to fix any time, because I don't remember the time that he was sus- pended, and I don't remember these different conversations I had with bim — that is, as to time. Q. Now, when Mr. Collins made the remark that he was in hell on earth, was that in that first conversation that you have detailed after he was suspended ? — A. I think it was. Q. Had he ever before made any such remark as that to you? — A. Not that he had been living a hell upon earth, but Q. (Interposing.) That is what I asked, whether he had made that remark? — A. No; he never did. Q. Now, when he told you that he was living in a hell upon earth did he specify what the things were that constituted that condition of things in his mind ? — A. I don't remember that he did in fact. Q. In the course of that conversation he told you, did he not, about tlie orders for exercise, and about the taking of the instruments ? — A. Well, I don't know as he did about taking all of his instruments. Q. No ; but I say he told you in that same conversation about it ? — A. He told me that he had been suspended, and been told that he could not have the use of any instruments at that time. Q. Now, did you understand that this phrase that he used he used because he had been suspended — that he considered that constituted hell upon earth ? — A. Well, I didn't consider it in that way. Q. Then can you tell me from the conversation you had with him what it was made him use that expression ? — A. That it was the general treat- ment that he received in the ward-room and in th(j cabin. Q. The general treatment? — A. Yes. Q. Now, did he specify who were the parties that had treated him in that way ? — A. He said that they were always making game of him, and came at him in a way that he could not resent, and made it unpleasant for him. Q. And did he speak of who they were that came at him in such a way that he could not resent it? — A. As I understood, it was a sort of a general thing. Q. A general thing ? — A. That is what I understood. Q. From his conversation ? — A. Yes. Q. And you do not know any one in particular who came at him in such a way ? — A. I believe Mr. Melville and the doctor were the only ones that I remember now that he spoke of in particular. Q. You told on Saturday what it was about Mr. Melville ; that he sang Irish songs and told Irish stories ? — A. I think he said he used to do that and used to do it to annoy him. Q. What did Dr. Ambler do that was so dreadful ? — A. I don't re- member exactly what he did say any further than to make remarks that were annoying to him. Q. When was it that he made the remark about being dogged like a poor man's cur ? — A. I think that was the time that he was telling about being x3ut under suspension. Q. Did he tell you what had been said or done that led him to use 76 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. that expression ? — A. Well, I think it was because Captain De Long used to watch him when he went in to record the noon observation at 12 o'clock. Q. Did you know that Captain De Long did any such thing? — A. I was not aware of it myself, sir. Q. Now, did Captain De Long exercise any more supervision, to your knowledge, over Mr. Collins than he did over any other man on board the boat ? — A. He did not ; no, sir. Q. You spoke about an order being given by Captain De Long to Mr. Co!lins to let go of the rope? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Before Mr. De Long reiterated the order did he wait a sufficient time to permit Mr. Collins to obey the order? — A. Well, I think he could have obeyed it instantly had he tried. Q. Then I understand you to say that he did wait a sufficient time for him to show whether he intended to obe\^ the order or not ? — A. Well, I don't know whether you would consider it a sufficient time or not. He stood and looked at Mr. De Long may be a quarter of a minute or l)erhaps a half a minute. Q. And how did he look ? — A. He looked at him the same as one man would look at another. Q. Oh, but there are a good many different ways in which one man would look at another. Did he look at him defiantly? — A. I don't know that he did. I don't know that I noticed him particularly. Q. Y^ou spoke about a willingness to take the dogs. I would like to know whether you did at any time take any from the natives? — A. Well, we used to go out and take a fish once in awhile when we could find it. Q. How large a supply of provisions did you have on hand at the time that Kusmah Avent down to Bulun? — A. I think it was about that time that the natives began to catch an abundance of fish there. Q. I say how large a supply did you have at that time? — A. I think we were gettiug a sufficient amount. Q. Did you hear in the conversations that took place between any of the officers and Mr. Kusmah any price fixed that Kusmah was to be paid ? — A. I did not hear that conversation, but it was talked over. Q. You did not hear that conversation? — A. No, sir; I did not hear it. Q. So that there Avere conversations in regard to what was to be done by this man, or arrangements made with him, that you did not hear? — A. Yes, sir ; there Avere. Q. Had you with you any instrument to tell the latitude and longi- tude ? — A. Not in the whale-boat, sir. Q. As matter of fact, Avhen you Avere upon the shore, did you know within 30 miles of the exact place where you were? — A. No, sir; I did not. Q. And could you, therefore, at that time have made any attempt to go to any other place ? — A. We Q. (Interposing.) Could you? I am speaking of you, individually. — A. Yes. Q. You could?— A. Yes. Q. Did you have a chart with you that Avould enable you to follow the river? — A. I had the same chart that Mr. Dauenhower had, or a copy of it. Q. And no other? — A. That is all, sir. Q. Now, did that chart so designate the places and the courses and the mouths of the river that you would have been able to have taken JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 77 tliat chart and gone in an unknown country to Bulun, not knowing where you were'?— A. I think I could liave found Bulun ; yes, sir. Q. (Submitting a paper.) Is that the chart to which you refer ?— A. I had a copy of that chart 5 yes, sir. Q. It was a copy of that ? — A. Yes ; it was a copy of thafc chart. Mr. AiiNOUX. I would like that to be marked as a map identified. Mr. Curtis. There is no objection. The Witness. I will say that this looked like my chart. (The map shown the witness was a small pencil tracing belonging to Mr. Melville, and was marked on the back by the stenographer, Exhibit Ko. 1.) By Mr. Arnoux : Q. Mr. Bartlett, did you know of any man being subjected to any outrage on board that vessel ? — A. I did not, sir. Q. Did you know of any man being subjected to any indignity on board that vessel*? — A. I did not, sir. Q. Is it a fact that when you got upon the ice you were divided into three parties, or was it when you got to the edge of the water *? — A. When w^e went to the boats. I think it was at Bennett Island, about the 1st of August some time. Q. When you found Captain De Long and his party, did you find that they had traveled along the line of the river *? — A. Along the line of different rivers ; yes. Q. Did they not cross the country — A. In places I think they did, as far as I know. Q. That is what I say. Your judgment of the course which he had taken is that it had been across the country ! — A. To a certain extent at times across the country and at other times along the rivers. Q. But it was not confined to the line of the river, as near as you could judge ! — A. As near as I know, it could not be confined to any one river. Q. Did you know of anybody on or about the 3d of October, volun- teering to go in search of your missing shipmates ? The Witness. When was that, 1881 "? Mr. Arnoux. 1881. A. Well, I think that Mr. Danenhower talked of it ; I think that we all talked of it, in fact. Q. Was not the only olfer that you made to go as a volunteer to go to Bulun in the fall ? — A. I don't know^ that that was the only one. I think that in a general sort of a way we had talked it all over and were all willing to go, or showed a willingness to go. Q. Did you not^ in answering one of the questions before the Court of Inquiry say — I desire to state that my volunteering was in regard to going to Bulun, but not for tke search for Lieutenant De Long. A. I think I did ; yes, sir. Q. Is not that correct? — A. Yes, sir; as to my volunteering. But I say that in general conversation, or in a general way, we all showed a. willingness to undertake it. Q. I did not ask if you show^ed a w illingness ; I asked you if you vol- unteereed to go, on or about the 3d of October, in search of Captain De Long and his party ? — A. I did not, sir, as 1 remember, Q. At the time that you and your party reached the bodies of Captaini De Long and the others that you found, had any one reached them be- fore? — A. Mr. Melville and Mr. Mndemann w^ere there the day before I was; yes, sir. 78 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. And had anybody preceded them ? — A. Not to my knowledge ; no, sir. Q. There was one day's difference between your arrival and theirs? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, as matter of fact, if you had started at the time that you proposed going, or that you talked of doing it, would you have been able, as subsequent events proved, to have reached them before they died ? — A. Well, we might have reached some of them. Yes, sir ; I think we might. Q. Will you say that you certainly would have done it ? — A. No, sir ; I would not. Q. According to the best knowledge that you have, what was the time that they died ?— A. The 30th of October ; that is, the last of them. Q. The 30th of October "^ — A. Yes ; according to my best knowledge. Q. Now, at what date, as the earliest possible date, could you have set out to find them '^ — A. I think we could have set out for Bulun about the 16th. Q. No j I am speaking of the earliest possible date to go to find De Long. The Witness. That we could have started ? Mr. Arnoux. Yes. A. I think we could have started about the 15th or 16th. Q. Of October ? — A. Yes ; that we could have started then j it would have been possible. Q. It would have been possible 1 — A. I think so. Q. On that date did you know where they were ? — A. I did not. Q. Consequently do you think it would have been possible for you to have started out on the 16th of October and have found them, when they died by the 30th of October, when you did not know where you were to go to find them ? — A. I don't know whether we could or not. Q. I say do you think it possible that you could ? — A. Perhaps we would have stood a better chance than we did in Geeomovialocke. Q. I did not ask about the better chance ; I asked was it probable that they could have been found, in your judgment 1 — A. The proba- bilities are that if we had followed the main river to the northward we would have fallen in with Nindemann and Noros. Q. What time did they reach the main river? — A. As well as I know it was about the 15th or 16th — somewhere along there. Q. Then they would not have passed down before you reached the main river? — A. Had they passed down we would have learned it from the natives. Q. Did you meet any natives on the main river ? — A. There are na- tives living on the main river; yes. Q. Did you meet them ? — A. Yes. Q. How many did you meet ? — A. I don't know how many I met. I stopped at one village where there might have been Q. (Interposing.) No, no ; not what might have been, but what you found ? — A. I didn't count them. Q. But what you saw? — A. I might have seen anywheres from fifty to one hundred. Q. Now, how far was that up the river ? — A. Well, I think they call that 60 versts north of Bulun, about. Q. And how much is a verst ? — A. We used to calculate it two-thirds of an English mile, I believe. Q. That would be 40 miles ?— A. About that. Q. From the place where you were in October, would you have JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 79 struck that village in going to find De Long?— A. Yes j I think we would have probably gone that way. Q. Do you know that you would ? — A. I do not, sir. Q. (Submitting record of Court of Inquiry.) I wish you to look at your evidence given before the Court of Inquiry and state to this com- mittee how many questions that were put to you were ruled out. — A. (After perusing the testimony referred to.) I think they are all in here 5 yes, sir. Q. Now tell how many there are.— A. I will have to stop and count them. Mr. Arnoux. It will only take you an instant. Does not the record show? The Witness. It is shown right here. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. This is part of the court's record. Just count how many there are. The Witness. You have them all marked ? Mr. Arnoux. Yes. A. There are four that you have marked. Q. Do you find any more ? — A. No, sir. Q. Then every question that was put to you you were allowed to an- swer with perfect freedom, were you not? — A. Yes ; 1 think so. Q. I want to ask you one or two questions further in regard to this matter of drunkenness. How many times did you see any one of the officers intoxicated during the time you were on board the vessel — any one officer, the greatest number of times ? — A. I don- 1 know as I can remember the greater number of times or the lesser number. I have seen some of them. Q. Take any one of those officers. How many times do you remem- ber that you saw any one officer drunk? — A. Well, twice, that I remem- ber of distinctly. Q. And how many times do you remember any one officer being guilty of talking with the men in the way that you have spoken of? Mr. Curtis. In what way? Q. You said that the officers were talking with the men in such a way as to create insubordination. — A. No, I did not. Q. What, besides intoxication, do you say you know as unofficerlike conduct in regard to the officers you have named ? — A. Well, there were a number of points in regard to some of them. Q. Let us know them. This inquiry is to get out all the facts. — A. Well, the example that was set before the men in regard to certain things. Q. That is what I referred to. You said that that tended to make insubordination, did you not ? — A. No, sir ; I did not. . Q. Now, the example that was set before the men must have been improper example, otherwise it would not have been unofficerlike. — A. I think it was unofficerlike. Q. Now, how many times did that occur with any one of them ? — A. I don't know that I could state the exact number of times that it occurred. Q. Was it anything that was detrimental to the permanent discipline of the ship? — A. It would be detrimental to the Q. (Interposing.) No, no; not what it would be. I am asking as matter of fact, in the way you were situated. — A. Not on board the ship; no. 80 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. I tbiuk I iiDderstood you to say tbat you had seen all tlie men under the iuHueDce of liquor more or less at different times! — A. Yes; at different times. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. All the members of the party? — A. Well, during- the cruise — all of them. The Chairman. Men and officers? Mr. Arnoux. He has named the officers that he saw. Now he says all the rest. The Witness. I did not say all of the officers. By Mr. Boutelle: Q. Part of the officers and all of the men? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What means had the men for procuring drink? — A. It was served out to the men once a week. But this did not all occur on board the ship. Q. Were there any means of intoxication outside the ship? — A, There Avere at certain places; yes, sir. Q. What kind of beverage could you get up there? — A. The most I believe that we had we obtained in Ounalaska from the natives there. They called it quass. Q. What is it? — A. I don't know what the compound is. It made some of them very happy, though. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. I am speaking of while you were on the ship ? — A. I said that not while we were on the ship did I see all these people under the inlluence of liquor. Q. Now did you see any of the officers under the influence of liquor while on board tlie ship? — A. I did, sir. Q. What officers did you see under the influence of liquor ? — A. Mr. Chi pp. Q. How many times did you see him under the influence of liquor? — A. I think twice, as I remember. Q. Did you ever see Mr. Collins under the influence of liquor ? — A. Not that I know of; no, sir. Q. Do you remember the time of his birthday party ? — A. I don't know that I do. Q. Try to put your mind upon it and see if you do not recollect that fact. — A. I remember something about his birthday, yes. Q. Now, what was his condition on that day ; was he absolutely and perfectly sober during the entire day ? — A. I don't know that he was in- toxicated, sir. Q. I did not ask you that; I asked you the other question. Will you swear that he was absolutely and perfectly sober during the entire day? — A. I would, as far as I know; yes. I did not see him drink anything. Q. I did not ask you what you saw him drink. — A. As far as I re- member his actions, he was. Q. Absolutely sober? — A. As far as I know. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. What was your oi)iuion? — A. I did not see anything that would create a different opinion that I know of. Q. Did you ever see any of the officers driidv on board the ship? — A. Yes, sir. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 81 Q. Where j in what part of the ship ? — A. In different parts of the ship ', in the cabin and in Mr. Ohipp's room also. Q. Did you drink with them ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. What officers ?— A. I think it was Mr. Melville, and I don't know whether Mr. Danenhower was there or not ; I don't remember ; and Mr. Ohipp. I don't know whether Mr. Danenhower was there or not. I am inclined to think that he was not. He might have been, though. I don't remember. Q. In the cabin ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was it customary for the officers to drink with the men in the cabin ? — A. It was not a customary thing ; no, sir. Q. Do you know of any other cases ^ The Witness. Any other cases of what? Mr. BouTELLE. Where the officers drank with the men in the after- part of the ship 1 — A. I believe there were occasions that I remember when I saw them. By Mr. Arnoux : Q.. When was it, as you recollect, that the officers drank in the cabin with you the first time ? — A. I think it was the night before we sailed from San Francisco, as I remember it. Q. When was the next time 1 — A. The next time that I drank with Mr. Ohipp was in St. Michael's. I think I drank with Mr. Ohipp alone that time in his room. Q. And when was the third time? — A. I think the third time was when we returned from Henrietta Island, shortly before the crushing of the Jeannette. By Mr. OURTIS : Q. When you were asked, did you see any outrage or indignity offered to anybody on board the ship, you meant in your answer to say, I sup- pose, that you did not see any one physically maltreated ? — A. I did not. Q. I say you meant by your answer to say that? — A. On board the ship, I believe, the question was. Q. When you said that you witnessed no violence or indignity offered to anybody on board the ship, you meant by that, I suppose, that you saw no one physically maltreated or injured ? — A. I saw no one physic- ally maltreated or injured. Q. Well, is that what you meant by your reply ? The Witness. While on shipboard does that question apply to ? Mr. OuETis. Yes. A. I saw no one maltreated or injured. Q. What did you understand when the words outrage and violence were used by the counsel? — A. I understood that he wanted me to tes- tify whether I had seen any one violently treated or openly misused. Q. That is what I mean exactly -, that is what you had in view when you made the answer, was it not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And therefore you said it was true that you did not see any one openly and violently misused physically ? — A. Yes j I think I did. Q. Still, as you have repeatedly said, Dr. Oollins complained to you of the treatment that he had received ? — A. Yes, sir. Mr. OuRTis. It is not contended that he was physically maltreated or any physical outrage or indignity put upon him except that which was involved in the arrest. Q. Now, when you were before the Board of Inquiry the questions 6 JQ* 82 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. tliat were put to you were put by the judge-advocate in writing, were they not ; they were read to you, were they not ? — A. Yes, sir j as I remember it. Q. And you answered in the briefest, most comprehensive way to the questions that you were permitted to answer ? — A. I did, as briefly as I could. Q. And whatever might have been the feeling that animated your associates before that Board of Inquiry you yourself at the time of your examination were influenced by the sentiment that you have described to us ? — A. I was ; yes, sir. Q. And you felt in no disposition to volunteer testimony! — A. I did not feel in any disposition then. Q. And if you had been asked the questions that I have asked you would or would not you have answered them ? — A. I think I should have had to. Q. Exactly ; so you would. And you were in that mood of mind that you felt the less you had to say and the sooner you got out of it the better for you, did you not ? — A. I did. Q. That was your mood of mind ? — A. That was the mood of mind I was in at that time. Q. Very well. IS^ow the learned counsel, with a good deal of elab- oration — I won't follow it — asked you how many questions were ruled out. Now in the first place the record shows that, but I suppose that you have the judgment and the common sense to know that one ques- tion may be ruled out that will affect and change the entire aspect of a case, have you not f — A. Well, I think it might lead to bringing out other points. Q. And it struck you as a peculiarity then, and does it not now, that the questions that were excluded by the court, on motion of the judge- advocate or otherwise, were questions that seemed to tend in the direc- tion of the inquiry which we are now making? — A. Yes, sir; it seemed so to my mind. Q. i^ow, you told us on Saturday that you had certain notes and records. Have they yet arrived f — A. No, sir ; they have not. Q. So that, in point of fact, after this lapse of time, both on Saturday and to-day, you have been testifying entirely as to dates, places, and circumstances from your memory 1 — A. Yes, memory only. Q. And, of course, like all other human faculties, it is fallible! — A. Yes, sir. Mr. BouTELLE. I think the witness is hardly competent to give evi- dence on that point. That is a physical fact. Mr. Curtis. He has given evidence on naval discipline, on meta- physics, and on everything except Proctor's System of Astronomy. Mr. BouTELLE. Counsel ought to assume that the committee know something. Mr. Curtis. Certainly. I only want to show the committee what a remarkable man this must be, because my learned friend was allowed to examine him on almost every possible thing. Mr. BouTELLE. I do not feel interested in hearing the testimony of this witness on a i)hilosophical fact — about memory. Mr. Curtis. I hope my brother will remember that hereafter. Q. (Resuming.) This was the first ship of war, you say, you were ever on before you were a man ! — A. Yes, sir. Q. When you were a boy you sailed in a man-of-war ! — A. I made one cruise 3 yes. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 83 Q. As a boy. How old were you ? — A. Well, it was done when I was fifteen years old. Q. And how long a cruise ? — A. Nine months. Q. And what were you ; an able seaman ? — A. No, sir j I was a landsman -, that is, I was rated as a landsman, I think. Q. And was that on a man-of-war *? — A. Yes, it was on board the ship Quaker City during the rebellion. Q. There was no occasion during that voyage, as far as you remember, for any one of the officers to make a confidant of you? — A. No, sir. Q. And there was no such friendship on that particular voyage as grew up between you and Collins on this expedition where you were daily brought together? — A. No, sir. Q. Now, he was an Irishman by birth ? — A. To the best of my knowl- edge he was. Q. And to the best of your knowledge and opinion he was a gentle- man of education and refined insticcts; he was a sensitive man, was he not? — A. I think he was. Q. Did you know or do you know anything about the nationality of Mr. Melville? — A. Only what I have heard him say, sir. Q. An English gentleman, is he not? — A. I think he claims to be of Scotch origin, born in this country. I have heard him say so. I don't know. Q. You see nothing extraordinary in the fact of a sensitive Irish gen- tleman being annoyed by the songs that he conceived to be sung in de- rision of his country, do you ? Mr. Arnoux. I submit that is not a proper line of inquiry. A. Well no; that is, in my opinion. Mr. Curtis (to Mr. Arnoux). I say you are not fair. I give you every possible latitude on earth. The Chairman. It is a matter of conclusion really. Mr. Curtis. But if the committee please, I have given the other side every latitude and I am only traveling over their ground. You will find I do not advance a step beyond the ground of the cross-examination. It is I who give way in everything. The moment they run to the end of their rope and I seek to get at the truth then immediately is erected this barricade of objection. Mr. Arnoux. It is only the second question, and I have made my objection and the committee can pass upon it. The Chairman. Any fact may be proven. Mr. Curtis. That is a fact. The Chairman. The committee can determine whether it is an indig- nity or not. If he is asked as to the fact of an indignity being offered to Mr. Collins, and then asked in what that indignity consists, he might state that in his opinion that was an indignity. Mr. Curtis. Well, I certainly ought to have the privilege of going over the ground that they have spaded up. The Chairman. You will have it. Mr. Curtis. If one rule is for them and another for me I want sim- ply to understand it in advance. The Chairman. The same rule is to be for both. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Did you or did you not make a mistake on Saturday when you stated that so far as appeared, or as far as your knowledge went, the last entry in the journal of Mr. De Long was on September 20? — A. If I said it was on September 20 it was a mistake clearly. I think it was October 30 that 1 said. 84 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. (Submittiug record of Court of Inquirj^) Now, in point of fact, Mr. Witness, is it not October 30 !— A. " 140th day "j yes, sir. I think that is what I said. Mr. Curtis. You said the 20th of September. You may have said the 30th of October afterwards. I do not want to leave anything for my friend's ingenuity. It is best to build as we go. The Witness. I gained it from De Long's own journal, and I think I stated it was October 30. By Mr. Curtis: Q. Now, in point of fact, when you have repeated here in answer to the questions of the learned counsel that all was done that was possible in the search for De Long, did you not confine yourself to or mean to be understood that everything was done after the search commenced? — A. I think everything was done after it commenced. Q. Did you not mean to be so understood ? — A. Yes, that is the way I calculated to be understood; that after the search was commenced everything was done that could be done ; that is, in my judgment. Q. But you did not mean to be understood that the search could not have been made before ? — A. I think the search could have been started earlier had we gone to Bulun at the time I made the proposition to go. Q. In the light of subsequent events, you could have gone to Bulun earlier, could you not ? — A. I think we could, yes ; sir. Q. Now, in point of fact, where were you on the IGth day of October ? — A. I think I was in Geemovialocke. Q. How many days' journey is it from Geemovialocke to Bulun? — A. I think when I went I made it in thirty-six hours actual traveling time, as near as I could judge. Q. Did you go by a deer team or a dog team ? — A. I went by a deer team, sir. Q. That would be a day and a half? — A. Yes, of actual traveling time. Q. From Geemovialocke to Bulun ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many days actual travel Avas it from Bulun to the spot where De Long's body was found? — A. Well, I don't know how quick it was. I think two days and a half would do it. I said two and a half or three days, I think. Q. Yes, and to go at the outside you could do it in four, could you not? — A. I think that some of our party did it in less than four. Q. Well, we will say four. Then for the day and a half we will give two days. That would make six days. There is no doubt in your mind that the journey from Geemovialocke to Bulun, to the spot where De Long's body was found, could be made in six days? — A. Oh, yes; I think it could be made in less than that. Q. We will say six. You are positive about that? — A. Yes, to the best of my knowledge, I could make it in two and a half or three. Q. Well, sixteen and six are twenty-two. That would make it eight more days to the time, according to this journal, when De Long had the strength to make his last memorandum? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You do not know in point of fact how long he lived after he made this last entry, do you? — A. No, sir. Q. So far as you have any positive knowledge he may have lived a month? — A. So far as I have any positive knowledge. Q. He may have lived two months, he may have lived three months? — A. ^es, so far as I know. Q. And still within all this period of time, this one month, these two JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 85 months, tliese three months, you were as a physical fact within, we will say, six clays' journey of the spot where his body was found? — A. At certain times, yes, sir; not all the time. Q. Now, the country between where you were and where he died was at intervals more or less inhabited? — A. Well, at certain times of the year it was. Q. There were men and dogs and deer, and, of course, if all those ani- mals lived there there was subsistence to keep them or it was obtain- able? — A. Yes, there was subsistence there for them where we were. Q. Now right here. How did that ship become entangled in the ice? — A. Well, she was driven in there, as I remember it. Q. By bad seamanship? — A. I think not; no, sir; not in my opinion. Mr. Arnoux. He is not a seaman and never was a seaman. Mr. BouTELLE. We will take his opinion for what it is worth. By Mr. Curtis : Q. You were driven in there? — A. As hard as her engines could drive her; yes, sir. Q. Then you tried to get in there? — A. We did. Q. You tried to put this steamer in the ice? — A. I thought that was the intention when I was on watch in the engine-room; yes, sir. Q. Well, so far as your knowledge extends, so far as your momory serves you, no effort was made to keep out of that ice? — A. As far as my knowledge goes I think the intent was to put her in there as the result shows. Q. Do you not know that she never was released from that ice; that she floated with that ice and sank ? — A. She did. Q. Do you not know that it is considered among stientific navigators as very bad seamanship to entangle a vessel in that way? — A. I don't know whether it is bad seamanship or not. Q. Do you not know that that is considered almost certain destruc- tion? — A. Yes; it is considered in my estimation almost certain de- struction to place a ship into an ice pack. Q. At the time that she was driven by the whole power of the ma- chinery and the steam of the vessel into this ice it was, as you thought at the time, by the intelligent direction and command of the officers of the ship? Mr. BouTELLE. I thought that it was unintelligent according to his former testimony. The Witness. I intended to convey theldea that I did not think it necessarily required bad seamanship to put a ship into the ice. Mr. BouTELLE. I understood you to say that you regarded it as bad seamanship. The Witness. I think not. Mr. BOUTELLE. I understood you so. Mr. Arnoux. I understood him to say just the other way; that he did not consider it was bad seamanship at all. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Therefore I ask you the question, is it not considered by all per- sons expert in arctic navigation that it is certain destruction to a ves- sel to entangle it in the ice ? — A. Not necessarily, as I understand it. Q. As you now understand it, is there any possible escape — can there be any possible escape for a vesssel wedged into the ice? — A. Not as long as she is wedged in; no, sir. Q. As you now understand, as you ever understood, or as you can 86 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. ever understand it, is it not almost inevitable that wlien the vessel is released by the drifting of the ice, by the thawing of the ice, that she sinks? — A. Well, I don't know. Q. This one did sink, did she not 1 — A. She did sink ; yes, sir. Mr. Curtis. Well, I will leave your oiiiniou for the present. It may not be important on that subject. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. Is there any open sea in the Arctic winter? — A. Not to my knowl- edge ; no, sir. There are what we used to call water-holes, caused by the breaking of the ice, which may last for an hour or may last for a day or may not last more than twenty minutes. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Now, you spoke of conduct unbecoming the officers of this ship, and on that you were extensively questioned in reference to your opin- ion by Mr. Arnoux. In any of the conduct of Mr. Collins did you see anything that your experience as a seaman or as a gentleman lead you to believe was unbecoming the dignity of an officer or a gentleman on any occasion ? — A. I did not. I do not remember of anything now. Q. You have said that on some occasions — and that was in response to the inquiries of Judge Arnoux and not in response to mine — that you did observe such conduct on behalf of the other officers of the ves- sel during the time and the history of the expedition. Now, I do not want you to confine yourself to the ship. I want you to tell me who the of- ficers were, whether on the retreat or on the ship, that indulged in in- toxication ? — A. Mr. Chipp indulged in it, Mr. Melville indulged in it, I think Mr. Danenhower indulged in it, and I think I saw Dr. Ambler once or twice when I thought he was intoxicated. Q. How many times did you see Mr. Melville intoxicated ? — A. I don't know, sir, Q. Well, I do not suppose you can give the exact number of times, but try and approximate it ? — A. Well, I don't know as I can give a statement. Q. To the best of your recollection was it twice ? — A. Well, we will say a number of times. Q. Well, was it twice ? — A. Yes, I think more than twice. Q. Was it four times 1 — A. It might have been. Q. Was it six times ? — A. It might have been six times that I saw him under the influence of liquor to a greater or less extent. Q. You were asked the question by the counsel whether or not in your judgment, in your opinion, that state of intoxication, whether fre- quent or infrequent, interfered with the success of the expedition. I want to ask you as a matter of opinion do you know of anything in in- toxication that under any circumstances enchances the probability of the success of any enterprise ; do you know of any enterprise that intoxi- cation helps ? — A. I don't really know. Q. Then as a matter of oi)inion you would not consider it essential to the success of that expedition that the officers were drunk, would you ? — A. Well, I should not consider it essential to the success of it. Q. Would you consider intoxication as a maintenance of the proper law of discipline in the Navy, under the circumstances ? — A. To the best of my knowledge, no. Q. Do you know anything in the regulations of the Navy that directs or requires that a man should get intoxicated ? — A. I do not, sir. Q. Do you know of any regulation of the Navy that prohibits it ? — JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 87 A. I don't know as it is strictly forbidden, but I know that intoxication or becoming' drunk is not considered to be the proper thing. Q. Now, Mr. Bartlet, I believe that you have stated that you attended before this Board of Inquiry on the subpoena of the [Jnited States ; were you subpcenaed ! — A. I was never subpoenaed, I think. I never received a subpoena that I remember. Q. At whose invitation did you attend'? — A. I attended under orders from Commodore Upshur, I think, in New York. Q. And so far as you were allowed to testify on that occasion you do not now see how your testimony on that occasion was inconsistent or irreconcilable with your evidence now, do you'? — A. Well, I did not in- tend to make it so in any way. Q. The questions were not put to you and you did not propose to vol- unteer. That is about it, is it not? — A. I did not propose to volunteer. That is the feeling that I went there with. I did not feel as though I ought to volunteer anything. Q. Now, did you not have a conversation with Melville while at Gee- omavialocke as to De Long's whereabouts? — A. We used to discuss the probabilities of his whereabouts quite often ; yes, sir. Q. How early was that conversation"? — A. I think that we used to talk about it right along from the time we got there or shortly after- wards. Q. When did you arrive at Geeomavialocke ? — A. 1 think we arrived at Geeomavialocke the last of September somewhere ; the 25th or 26th or somewheres along there. Q. Then, in point of fact, you were at Geeomavialocke from^^the last of September until about the 16th of October, were you ? — A.*^ We were there longer than that, as I remember. Q. In point of fact, you were that long, were you not? — A. I think we were, as near as I remember j yes, sir. Q. When you had a conversation with Melville as to De Long's where- abouts, what did you say to him and what did he say to you? — A. We used to discuss the probabilities of their position in many different forms. Q. Did you say anything about starting a relief expedition? — A. Oh I think at different times we used to talk about it. Q. What were the objections raised, if any, by Melville ? — A. I don't think that there were any particularly raised. Q. Were there any generally raised ? — A. There was a controversy between him and Mr. Danenhower at the time that Mr. Danenhower wanted to start on a search, as I remember. Q. How long was it after you heard through Noros and Nindemann that you started on this search ? — A. I think Mr. Melville started the next day, as I remember it. Q. When did you hear from Noros and Nindemann ? — A. I think it was the 28th or 29th of September, I don't know which j along about that time, anyway. Q. How long had you known Kusmah before that ? — A. For quite a time. I think Kusmah came first to our place somewhere from the 8th to the 10th of October. Q. He was fully acquainted with that country, was he ? — A. He was acquainted with it pretty well. Q. Judge Arnoux uses the expression " refugee." What was he — a Russian exile ? — A. A Eussian exile. Q. You were in that portion of the Eussian Empire known as Siberia, 88 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. I suppose, the frozen Siberia. Are yoa at all certain about these dates until you get your notes and records ? — A. Ko, sir j I am not. Q. I will suspend your testimony in regard to dates until you get your notes and records. Did not Melville and Danenhower have a dis- cussion in your presence about going to Kusmah's house*? — A. I think that they came to the conclusion that Mr. Danenhower should go home with Kusmah when he went the first time that he was at our place. Q. And did he go ? — A. I think he did; yes, as I remember it. Q. Now, in reference to the instruments. You said on Saturday that Mr. Collins complained that his scientific instruments were taken from him, and a question was put to you by Mr. Boutelle, one of the commit- tee, whether or no, after his suspension and after he complained the instruments were taken from him, the observations were not less in num- ber than they had been before, and I think you answered yes *? Mr. Boutelle. I did not ask that question. I think it was the counsel. By Mr. Curtis. Q. You answered yes, did you not? — A. I think I answered that to the best of my knowledge tliey were not as frequent. Q. Now, let me ask you, keeping in view the relation in which Mr. Col- lins stood to the expedition before his suspension, before his arrest, these observations were regular, constant, and frequent, were they not? — A. I think, as near as I know, they were made every hour. Q. Now, as matter of fact, while you are on that topic, were not worth- less instruments brought on the retreat and good ones left behind? — A. I think there were better instruments left behind than were brought. That is my opinion. Mr. Boutelle. What instruments do you refer to, judge. Mr. Curtis. You may ask him that question. I prefer you would. Mr. Boutelle. I want to ascertain whether they were meteorologi- cal instruments? Mr. Curtis. Yes ; nautical instruments. Mr. Boutelle. That is what I want to get at. You had better have that specified. Put in nautical. Mr. Curtis. No; do not put in anything he does not say. By Mr. Boutelle: Q. What instruments do you refer to ? — A. I supposed he was re- ferring to nautical instruments. Q. What do you mean when you speak of nautical instruments? — A. I particularly refer to the compasses that were brought with us for the boat's use. Q. In your opinion they took poorer compasses than those that were left behind? — A. For that use; yes, sir Q. On what do you form that opinion? — A. Well, the compass that we had was almost useless in the boat, while there were compasses that were better adapted to that use. Q. What was the trouble with it? — A. It was small and would not work so that you could judge anything from it. Q. Was it the regular compass that was intended for use in that boat? — A. No, sir; I think not. It was a small prismatic compass, I think. Q. Did they not on the expedition as part of the discipline of the ship have compasses regularly assigned to each of the boats? — A. I think that arrangement was made to the best of my knowledge. It was in the first place. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 89 Q. And in reference to tlie time they left the vessel they did not t ake with your boat the one that belonged to them! — A. No, sirj they did not. Q. Do you know why 1 — A. I do not. I heard the captain ask Mr. Melville, I think, if he should take out a boat's compass. My duty was at such a time to assist Mr. Melville under his instructions. I was in the cabin helping to remove things. I helped to remove several articles and get them on the ice. I heard Melville say to the captain, " Captain, shall we take these boat compasses ?" ''No," he says, "I think we have others." That was the answer he made. Q. What did he mean by others? — A. Other compasses, as I under- stood. I don't remember just the words he used, but he said he had other compasses. By Mr. Arnoux: Q. Were the compasses lighter in weight than those left behind? — A. I think probably they were a little, but I don't know. Q. Now, was there anything else besides compasses in the way of better instruments that were left behind? — A. I don't know that there was. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Did you ever meet Mr. Gilder, the Herald correspondent? — A. I did sir. Q. Where? — A. At Geeomavialocke. Q. When?— A. I think it was in April, 1882. Q. That was long before the death of De Long, was it? — A. No, sir. Q. It was the year after ? — A. It was afterwards. Q. It was the spring afterwards that you found him ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. It was 1881 you found him. In point of fact, did you have a sex- tant in your boat ? — A. Not to my knowledge j no, sir, we didn't have any. Q. Now, did you hear any conversation between Mr. Gilder and Mr. Melville ? — A. I did, at Jakutsk ; yes, sir. Q. At any other place?— A. Only in the vicinity of Jakutsk. Q. That was after the survivors had been rescued, was it ? — A. That was when we were on our return home after the search. Q. Then it was after the survivors had bee^^ rescued, those that are living now ? — A. In my estimation I don't consider that we were rescued until we reached New York, all of us. Q. You think you were in danger coming over the continent of Europe? — A. I think we were. Q. Possibly you were. What conversation took place there between Melville and Gilder ? — A. Well, I don't know as I can state it. Q. Was there any ? — A. Yes ; there was an ordinary conversation. Q. Anything in reference to the expedition? — A. Well, I suppose there were different conversations between us about the result of the expedition and what we had done. Q. Don't you remember what it was? — A. No, sir; I don't know as I do. Q. Did Melville say anything to you about what Gilder had said to him? — A. Not that I remember; no, sir. Q. When Gilder, the Herald correspondent, arrived, had you any conversation with Melville about Gilder, and what was said when he first arrived? — A. Mr. Gilder had been at Geeomavialocke, and had gone further on his road to Irkutsk before Melville had arrived there. Melville did not see him until we arrived at Irkutsk. 90 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. Where did you meet Jackson ! — A. At Geeomavialocke. Q. Where did you last meet Jackson ? — A. At a place called Olock- mer, on the Lena Eiver. Q. Do you remember any conversations that he had there with Mel- ville? — A. No; I could not give the substance of them. He had an order. I remember that he told Mr. Melville at one time he had a telegram from the minister in St. Petersburg, requesting him to turn over the books and papers for his inspection. Q. The American minister? — A. I think Irom Mr. Hunt in St. Peters- burg. Q. He was the American minister. Well, anything else? — A. Koj not that I remember. Q. Do your notes and records throw any light upon these conversa- tions; would they refresh your memory at all? — A. They might. Q. When will they be here? — A. I don't know, sir; I have sent for them. Q. When did you send for them? — A. Saturday morning. Q. How far?— A. To Dunkirk, in the State of New York. Q. That is not a great distance? — A. No, sir. Q. What did Melville say to you when he first saw Gilder?— A. I don't remember as he said anything to me in regard to him. Q. When Mr. Melville first saw Gilder, the Herald correspondent, did he not tell you to look out, and did he not say, addressing you and others, "Now, boys, keep a damned close mouth, for there is a damned reporter after us " ? — A . I think he told me to keep a close mouth if I saw him. Q. Didn't he tell you that the reason was that there was a damned reporter after you? — A. I think those were the words he used. Q. Have you not so stated repeatedly?— A. I may have said that he had told me so. Q. Well, it is true, is it not? — A. Yes, it is true. Q. Now, after Gilder, Jackson appeared on the scene, did he not? — A. Yes; he did, as I remember it. Q. Now, did Melville say to you, "Who do you think is after us? A damned big-headed English reporter " — and Noros was with you at the time. With Jackson, "You must keep a close mouth and not tell these reporters anything"? — A. Yes; I think that is what he said, as I remember it. Q. Where was it that he told you that? — A. At Geeomavialocke, I think. Q. And that was in April of 1882 ? — A. I think so ; yes. Q. Now, do you know of any reasons why he should give you that injunction ? — A. I don't know of any particular reason why he should ; no. Q. You are not in any present intimidation or fear of Mr. Melville ? — A. I am not, sir ; not in the least. Q. Were these conversations in reference to the reporters held in your presence and in the preseiice of Noros ? — A. I think Noros was not there at the time. He Avas with Mr. Jackson. Q. But the conversation held in reference to Jackson was held in the presence of Noros, was it not ? — A. I think Nindemann was there when he made the assertion. Q. Now, I would like to ask you a question, if you please, Mr. Bart- lett; and please follow this, and if there is any word that you do not understand the meaning of please call my attention to it and do not answer unless you do. If your party had left Geeomavialocke after JE ANNETTE ^INQUIRY. 91 sixteen days and gone to Bulun, whicli would bring you there on the 12th, and started a party north along the route De Long was known to have laid out to follow, what would have been the chances of reach- ing De Long's party *? — A. I think that they would have fallen in with Nindemann, and JS^oros, or would have been likely to have done so. Q. And they would have directed you to De Long's party or very near where De Long was ? — A. Well, I think they would have been able to. Q. Now, have you any means of opinion or knowledge that De Long's party for a long time previous to their destruction kept signal fires burning constantly in the neighborhood in which they were located ? — A. The only knowledge I have of it is what I obtained from De Long's own journal and what we supposed to be the remains of one of their fires near where they were found. Q. When did you find that fire '^ — A. We found the remains of it about the time we found the remains of De Long, or a few days later. Q. And that was in March, you say? — A. That was March 23 or 24, as I remember it. Q. That was in March, 1882"? — A. As I remember j yes. Q. You found the remains of a fire in March, 1882. Of what had that fire evidently been built'!— A. Logs of wood. Q. Where ; on the ground? — A. Yes, on top of the bank alongside of the river. Q. And some portions of it apparently had not burned away — A. Yes ; there were remains there. Q. Still remains of that fire? — A. It was not burning, sir. Q. Ko. But there Avere the remains of it in a charred condition? — A. The remains of a fire that had been there. Q. Was the ground bare there? — A. Comparatively. There was not a great deal of snow. Q. Has your experience taught you in any way to tell, with any accu- racy, when a fire was built by the remains that you see? — A. Eo, sirj I could not have told. Q. You cannot tell whether that fire apparently was lighted recently or days or months before ? — A. E"o, sir ; I could not tell in regard to that. Q. For all you know it might have been lighted very recently? — A. Yes, sir ; I think it had been lighted very recently ; but the length of time, of course, I would not attempt to say anything about. Q. Now, you saw the body of De Long, did you ? — A. Yes, sir ; I did. Q. What other bodies did you see ? — A. Dr. Ambler's, Ah Sam's, Mr. Collin s's, Walter Lee, Kaak. Q. That is enough. Now, did you have any difficulty in identifying the bodies of all those jjeople that you have mentioned ? — A. Not at that time ; no, sir. Q. You could have told De Long and you could have told all these other persons ? — A. Yes, sir ; as well as while living. Q. Therefore does it or does it not 'strike you as probable that their dissolution at the time you found them was probably quite recejit ? — A. Well, it would be difficult to state in regard to that from my own knowl- edge. Q. I am only asking your own opinion. I know you are not a sur- geon or an anatomist ? — A. My opinion is that it must have occurred after freezing weather set in, because they would have remained in that same condition until the warm weather came on in the spring to decom- pose them. 92 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. Then all the probabilities, so far as your judgment is concerned, are that these persons must have died after the warm weather set in'? — A. After the cold weather set in. Q. Would not the warm weather affect the remains ? — A. Yes ; but they had not been there during any warm weather that I know of. Mr. Arnoux. They do not have much warm weather during the period from the end of October to the beginning of March. Mr. Curtis. We will concede that ; but they have grass in the ex- treme north as early as the middle of May. Q. (Eesuming.) All diflftculties aside, you had no difficulty in recog- nizing the features and the persons of these people? — A. Not a bit, sir. Q. Now, what did you find with them j did you find any i)roperty of any kind 'I — A. Yes, sir. Q. What? — A. I believe Mr. Melville found some gold pieces on Cap- tain De Long, and papers, personal effects, and so on j and the journals and papers that he had with him pertaining to the expedition. Q. There were no provisions found in and about there? — A. Not a mouthful, sir. Q. Nothing to indicate the presence of provisions? — A. Nothing. Q. Either in an eatable or uneatable condition ? — A. Nothing obtain- able by them, I should say. Q. Did you make a search to that end? — A. Not any further than to search for the papers and records that we knew they had with them. Q. Was there, so far as you know, any autopsy made of any of the bodies? — A. There was not. What do you mean by that? Mr. BouTELLE. Post-mortem examination is a more familiar term, perhaps. The Witness. No, sir; there was not. By Mr. Curtis : Q. So far as you know, there was no post-mortem examination of any of the bodies? — A. No, sir. Q. So far as you know, when, for the first time, did the bodies come under the observation of a physician or surgeon? Did they ever? — A. Well, only one of them that I know of; that was the remains of Mr. Col- lins. Q. When and where did his remains come under the observation of a surgeon or physican ? — A. At Verkeransk. Q. That is in Siberia, is it not ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. On the road to Jakutsk? — A. Yes; it is on the road from Bulun to Jakutsk. Q. What doctor saw him there ? — A. A man that we used to call Dr. Bailey, I think. Q. Was he connected with the expedition? — A. He was not; he was a Russian exile, acting as a physician. Q. So far as you know, did he make any autopsy or post mortem ex- amination ? — A. He did not. Q. So far as your opinion and judgment go, what was the general ap- pearance of the bodies when found; were they emaciated and wan? — A. Well, sir, they were very white with the exception of what smoke and dirt was on them. Q. Very white ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. A sort of a pallid hue? — A. They were frozen very hard. Flesh tnrns that color when frozen, Q. And they were very emaciated, almost skeleton -like? — A. Yes; their bodies were a good deal thinner than their faces. JEA5TNETTE INQUIRY. 93 Q. Their faces were swollen or bloated ? — A. To a great extent, yes. I don't know that their faces were particularly bloated, but they re- mained in nearer a natural condition than the bodies had, I think. Q. What was the character of the country where De Long was found? — A. A very low country, level generally, filled with rivers run- ning in all directions, comparatively like islands nearer tiian anything else — nearer an archipelago than it would be a delta. Q. Was there anything in the nature of the country where his re- mains were discovered that would prevent these signal fires that he lighted — that is, if he did light them — or that were lighted by his com- panions, to prevent them from beiug seen by the people round about? — A. Well, no ; the country was comparatively level; more level than the country ordinarily is. Q. How was it that you happened to go to this exact &«pot where you found him? — A. I think it was through the knowledge that we gained from Mr. Nindemann. Q. And that knowledge was conveyed at the time you Avere at Geeomo- vialocke? — A. N"o, sir; when we were at Bulun. It commenced there. But the immediate finding of them while we were actually engaged in the search, while we were on the ground, I think came from the knowl- edge that was given by Mr. Mndemann. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. How did it come to Mr. Mndemann's knowledge? — A. From having traveled over the ground and been with them. Q. Was he one of De Long's party? — A. He was one of De Long's party. Q. You met him? — A. Yes, sir. By Mr. Curtis: Q. How high was this bank on which this fire had been kindled that you saw? — A. As near as I can judge I think it was about 30 feet above the level of the river at that time. Q. Well, now, as nearly as you can judge, considering the nature of the country, how far would a fire lighted upon a hill 30 feet high be seen in the country round about, either to the eye or to the eye aided by the glass? — A. Well, I think in a clear night, with the comparative dark- ness that prevailed, you might have seen the reflection of it probably 10 miles ; may be not as far. Q. You saw evidences there that he had made signal fires, did you not? — A. What we took to be evidences of his signal fires; yes, sir. Q. What evidence have you that they were made by De Long's party ? — A. There were foot-prints in the frozen snow that went from the place they bad been. We could trace them in places going back- wards and forwards to the place where this fire had been kindled. Q. At the time that you found the remains of De Long and his com- panions, was there anything to indicate that if they had had sufficient food they might not have lived? Had they sufficient raiment, clothing, &c. ? — A. Their supply of clothing was very scanty. Q. Was it sufficient to protect them from the climate if they had had sufficient food ? — A. Probably they could have lived. I think, without doubt, if they had had plenty of food there would have been no trouble about the clothing. The want of clothing might have created consid- erable suffering. Q. Have you any idea of the diameter of that fire ? — A. As near as I remember it the diameter was somewhere near 6 or 8 feet, perhaps. It might have been a little less ; it might have been a little more. 94 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. Did Danenhower order you to go to Bulun ou foot and take a gun and a rifle at any time ? — A. I think he ordered me to go to Bulun ; yes. Q. Did you go ? — A. Ko, sir. Q. Why not"? — A. Because there were arrangements made after- wards to send me by team. Q. When was it he desired you to go before you went by team ? — A. It was the time that the commandant came there with the telegram that Nindemann and I^oros had prepared to send to St. Petersburg in relation to the condition of De Long's i)arty. Q. When you actually went, how long afterwards was it? — A. I think it was the next day I started. I don't know but I started and went to Tomoose that night. Q. Were you not in as good condition to go on foot as Kusmah was ? — A. Yes ; but I don't understand that Kusmah went on foot. Q. But I say were you not in as good condition to go on foot as Kusmah was? — A. Yesj I think I was. Q. Were you not in as good condition to go in the same conveyance with him?— A. Yes. Q. Were you not in as good condition to go, whether on foot, by deer team, or dog team ? — A. Physically, I think I was. Q. It was physically possible for Kusmah to go on foot ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And It was physically possible for you to go on foot ? — A. Yes, sir ; I think I could have got there on foot. Q. So that, if you had not had the means of conveyance, both you and he could have gone, for that matter, could you not? — A. I think so J yes. By Mr. BouTELLE : Q. How much weight could you have carried on foot ? — A. I don't know in regard to that, sir. Q. I suppose the object of going would have been to carry relief in the form of provisions to De Long's party? — A. Well, yes; I think if there had been such a move made that would have been one part of the object. Q. What I want to ascertain is, how much of a burden of provisions you think each man could have carried on foot ? — A. I think I could have carried provisions enough to have made the journey from Geeo- movialocke to Bulun. Q. Yourself?— A. Yes. Q. How much more could you have carried ? — A. I don't know. Pro- visions were obtainable in Bulun. Q. I supj)osed you were talking about going from Bulun down. — A. No, sir. As I took it he asked me about going to Geeomovialocke at the time Kusmah went, or at the time Danenhower ordered me to get ready to go afoot, when we received the telegram that was brought by the commandant. By Mr. Curtis : Q. When Kusmah came from Geeomovialocke did he not come across the bay ? — A. Yes ; he had to. Q. And could not the bay have been crossed before ? — A. Possibly it might. I don't know that it could, but it might have been possible to have crossed it. Q. Did any of the commissioned officers keep a deck watch on the Jeannctte? — A. Not that I know of; no, sir. Q. If they had, would you probably have known of it ? — A. I would have been likely to. They might have, but I don't know of any. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. &\5 Q. Was it or was it not your duty to do so "?— A. Well, sir, I think it is customary in the I^avy for commissioned officers to stand a deck watch, but I am not positive in regard to it. Mr. BouTELLE. What period are you directing your question to j when she was at sea ■? Mr. Curtis. No, sir ; when she was entombed in the ice. Q. [Resuming.] Now I will put the question as to when she was at sea. Did you know of their keeping a deck watch then ? — A. No, sir j I did not. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. Who did keep the watches? — A. As far as I know the regular deck watches were stood by Ice-pilot Dunbar, Carpenter Sweetman, Boatswain Cole, and Mr. Nindemann. Q. There was no officer on deck in the night on duty? — A. Not to my knowledge ; no, sir. Q. Was the vessel under steam at that time? — A. Yes, sir. By Mr. Cuetis : Q. Now, there is no doubt of this in your mind. I do not wish that there should be any doubt about it. I repeat the question to you. Did any of the commissioned officers keep a deck watch on the Jeannette either when she was entombed in the ice or on the sea? — A. Not to my knowledge, sir. Q. And were you not on or about the, ship all the time? — A. I was on and in the ship all the time that she was steaming j yes, sir. Q. You were the fireman, were you? — A. That was my rating. I acted as assistant engineer. Q. Your duties necessarily kept you constantly in and about the ship ? — A. Yes, while she was steaming. Q. You spoke on Saturday of the attempt to go to Bulun by boat. Give us the particulars with which you are now familiar of that attempt to go to Bulun by boat. What did you do? — A. We started the morn- ing after we arrived at Geeomovialocke with three native pilots and a quantity of fish and supplies they had furnished us with and a small amount of pemican, taking the Russian Yapheme with us. He sat in the stern of the boat with Mr. Danenhower and Mr. Melville. I was taking soundings with ^ pole on the bow of the boat. The wind was blowing quite fresh and I think this Yapheme was frightened. He was afraid that the boat was going to swamp with us and kept telling them to keep inside the land. I, being sonnding with the pole, told them sev- eral times they would go ashore if they did not go further out. After I had made the statement several times I was told that the pilot was in the stern of the boat, consequently I kept my mouth shut. Q. You spoke on Saturday of some jealousy, as you termed it, between Danenhower and De Long, and in which you stated that Danenhower had told you that it was his intention on arrival in the States to have De Long broke if his (Danenhower's) friend. General Grant, should hap- pen to be President at the time. Do you remember that '? — A. Yes ; I think I said that Mr. Danenhower told me that when we returned to America if General Grant was President he could obtain influence enough to have him broke. I think that is the statement I made. Q. 1 suppose, as matter of fact, you did not have very frequent and political communication with the country up there ? — A. We did not ; no, sir. Q. And did not know positively whether Grant would be in or out ? — A. We did notj no, sir. 96 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. lu your judgment and opinion, from all that you observed and all that you know of the history of the expedition, was the feeling that ex- isted between De Long and Lieutenant Danenhower conducive to its success, or want of success ? Mr. Arnoux. I submit he has not shown anything to enable him to express an opinion on that subject. Mr. Curtis. He has shown that the feeling was so strong- Mr. Arnoux (interposing). This was on the ice, after the vessel was lost. Mt. Curtis. Exactly ; that is where the opinion comes in. Mr. Arnoux. I simply submit that to the committee. By the Chairman: Q. Did Danenhower say that the ship was lost on account of the mismanagement of Cai:)taiu De Long! — A. He did not say so to me; no, sir. Mr. Curtis. This resolution in its terms empowers this committee to inquire into the causes of the ill-success of this expedition. Now, this witness has testified to a conversation with Lieutenant Danenhower; I don't know whether it is true or false; perhaps when Lieutenant Danenhower goes on the stand he may say it is untrue. But while this witness is on the stand, and the object of the inquiry being to find out, in the language of the resolution, what were the causes that led to this want of success, it is perfectly competent. Of course it is not con- trolling or conclusive; but, in the language of the chairman, it goes in for what it is worth. It is not one flake of snow that makes the ava- lanche; it is not one fact that makes the proof in the case; it is the collection, the aggregation of facts and circumstances that constitutes the case. I should not ask that this witness' opinion be controlling by any means. I do not know who was in the right, even if a differ- ence did exist between De Long and Danenhower. It is not for me to say who was right. The only question is whether there was a differ- ence, and whether, in the opinion of the witness as an observer, it tended to the success or the ill-success of the expedition. That is all there is about it. The Chairman. The witness may give his opinion of the facts on which it is predicated. ISTow, if he knows of any fact of mismanage- ment himself, or if Lieutenant Danenhower told him of any fact of mis- management at that time, he can say so. But I do not think that his opinion, unless it is founded on fact, is admissible. Mr. Curtis. Can he not state the fact of the actual feeling existing between them ? The Chairman. Oh, yes. Mr. Curtis. Whether justifiable or not? The Chairman. He may state that. Mr. Curtis. We do not pretend to say who was right. The Chairman. He may state anything showing that there was a want of harmony between these two officers, but as to the effect of that want of harmony Mr. Curtis (interposing). That is for j^ou and the House to judge. That is why I have never asked the opinion of the witness. I did not want the opinion of the witness. The other side has gone into this mat- ter, and I want to follow it. The Chairman. You may prove any fact of the want of narmouy ; but the opinion of the witness as to whether that was prejudicial to the success of the expedition is another thing. JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 97 Mr. Danenhower. I submit it is not fair for the learned counsel to use my name in supposititious cases. He might as well use the name of President Arthur, or the name of anybody else. The reason I object is that he suggests that these questions were asked for effect. That fact is prejudicial to anybody whose name is brought into such cases. Mr. Curtis. My questions were not put for effect, but those of the other side were. The Chairman. It is for you to prove any facts or statements of these officers; but as to whether these were prejudicial to the success of the expedition, that is a conclusion. Mr. Curtis. All I want is that the same rule be applied to the other side as to me, and if you will keep in view The Chairman (interposing). If you raise the questions they will be determined. Mr. Curtis. I dislike toj it consumes so much time. I withdraw that question. By Mr. Curtis: Q. Had you any knowledge by information from either Lieutenant Dan- enhower or Lieutenant He Long, that there was any ill-feeling between those officers! — A. I have been told that there was ; yes, sir. Q. By whom *? — A. Mr. Danenhower. Q. Danenhower himself? — A. Yes, sir. Mr. Curtis. Kow, I would like, in justice to Mr. Danenhower, to in- quire of him in what way I am using supposititious cases ? Mr. Danenhower. In your previous conversations and questions, " If the ship is crushed it is De Long's fault," or something to that effect. Mr. Curtis. I don't think I put that question. Mr. Danenhower. I understood it in that way. Mr. Curtis. Ko, sir ; you are mistaken. Mr. Danenhower. It was in the form of a remark or question, and that is what I am objecting to. Anything relating to the facts I am willing to testify to. Mr. Curtis. I am willing to put a question similar to that, and I wish you to observe it, because I do not wish to do you or any gentleman in- justice. We are seeking after truth. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Did you hear Lieutenant Danenhower say to any other person in words or substance that the exi3edition had been ruined by the mis- management of De Long, and that on his return to the United States he intended to have him broke, or words to that effect 1 — A. I think that when he made the statement to me that he would have him broke if he could use influence enough, it was occasioned by the feeling that existed between him and Captain De Long. Q. About the failure of the expedition ? — A. I said that I think this conversation was brought on by the feeling that existed between Lieu- tenant Danenhower and Lieutenant De Long. Q. l^ow, what was the actual conversation between you and Danen- hower ? — A. The actual conversation, as I remember it, first started the second day after we commenced to travel. Mr. Danenhower had had partial duty from the time the ship had gone down. At that time he was in charge of No. 3 party, and he told me that De Long called him to his tent and told him that he would have to go with the hospital sled, as he was not capable of having charge of No. 3 party on account of his eyes. 7 J Q* 98 JEANNETTf. INQUIRY. Q. Lieutenant Danenliower was afflicted in his eyes ? — A. Yes ; he said that he considered he had been very much humiliated by being- placed off duty. Q. You are speaking of what Danenhower told you ? — A. Yes, this is what he told me. He appeared to feel the situation he was in very keenly, and I think, as I remember it, his eyes were filled with tears at the time he was talking. He said also that the captain was going to place me in charge of the party. Shortly after Captain He Long came to me and said that he had observed the day before while we were re- pairing sleighs that Danenhower had been a hindrance to the work of the men, and that he wanted me to take charge of the party and fix the sleigh and make a job of it. I says to him, "Captain, I don't care to be placed in charge of this party." Says I, "You had better place one of the seamen in charge." Says he, " Do as you are told, keep charge of the party, and make it as pleasant to Mr. Danenhower as you can ; do everything for his comfort"; and he says, "If you don't I'll attend to your case," and turned around and left me. Q. Are those his exact words as you remember them ! — A. Those were his exact words as I remember them. Q. When was the occasion of Lieutenant Danenhower stating that he would have De Long broke? — A. It was at the time we were in what is known in the report as the ten day camp at the island of Thadeowski, or off the coast of the island of Thadeowski, one of the new Siberian group. It was while we were sitting in the tent one day, as I remem- ber. Q. l^ow, as a matter of fact, did you ever know of any ill-feeling be- tween De Long and Lieutenant Chipp 1 — A. I did not know of any ill- feeling. Q. Kow, I ask you the question. Did Lieutenant Danenhower ever tell you in words or in substance, in any form or nature whatsoever, that the expedition had been ruined or greatly endangered in its success by the mismanagement of Captain De Long ? — A. I don't think he did. Q. Have you not stated something similar to that in this examina- tion already, either to-day or on Saturday ? — A. Not that I remember of; no, sir. Q. Did he say anything to you on that subject ? — A. I don't know that he said anything, only in regard to his own opinion. Q. Well, his own opinion. Do you understand the question *? — A. I think I have heard him say had he been in Captain De Long's place he would not put the ship in the ice. Q. Exactly. It is not his opinion whether it was right or wrong. Do you understand these questions that are put to you ! Mr. BouTELLE. The question was a very plain one, whether Danen- hower had stated to him that on his return he would have Captain ! De Long broke because of having endangered or hindered the expedi- tion by his mismanagement. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Kow, I ask you, did you hear Lieutenant Danenhower say, speaking | of Captain De Long, that he had endangered the success of the expe- dition by putting the ship in the ice, and that he never ought to have don( so ? — A. I think I heard him say that had he been in charge he would,, not have i)ut her into the ice at the time Captain De Long did. Q. Did he give you the reason"? — A. I don't remember whether he gave me any reason for it or not. Q. Did he not tell you as his opinion that it was bad seamanship to JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 99 put tliat ship in there? — A. I tliiiik lie said he would not have done it had he been in charge. Q. Exactly. Now, when he told you that on his return to this country he would have De Long broke, did he assign any reason for if? — A. I think he assigned as a reason that he had been deprived of privileges and duties which he thought he should have had control over. Q. That is, Lieutenant Danenhower had been deprived of privileges and the exercise of duties by the action of Captain De Long to which he thought himself entitled*? — A. Yes ; I think that was the spirit that was conveyed to me. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. That that was the ground on which he was going to have him broken 1 — A. Yes, sir j I took it in that way anyway. By Mr. OuRTiS : Q. He said that with some feeling, did he? — A. He did; he appeared to feel very badly over it, to think that he had been deprived as he had, and placed in the position he was placed in by the captain. Q. Lieutenant Danenhower was the second in command ?— A. He was the third, I think. By Mr. Arnoux: Q, Did I understand you aright, Mr. Bartlett, that the only com- plaint that Lieutenant Danenhower made was that Captain De Long had placed Mr. Melville at the head of the third boat's party instead of putting himself, Mr. Danenhower, at the head of it; was not that it ? — A. The first part of the complaint was at the time he placed me in charge of the party before Mr. Melville was put in charge of it. He said he thought he was capable of performing the duty of taking charge of the party. Q. Now, afterwards it was when Mr. Melville had been placed in charge? — A. At another time, I think, that Mr. Melville was placed in charge. He also made some remarks in regard to that to me. Q. Had Lieutenant Danenhower been sick at any time, and, if so, when was he put on the sick list 1 — A. I think he was put on the sick list about the first of January, 1880, or along about that time some- where. Q. And from that time on, how long did he continue on the sick list ? — A. I think he continued on the sick list up to the time of the crushing of the ship. Q. Do you know of his ever having been relieved from the sick list and ordered to duty from the first of January, 1880? — A. I think he told me that he asked the doctor Q. (Interposing.) I ask you whether you know of his being ordered to do it? — A. ISTo, sir; I don't know anything of the kind. Q. So far as you know, he had never been ordered by Captain De Long back to active dutj^? — A. No, sir; not that I know of. Q. Now, the doctor had no power to restore him to duty, had he? — A. As I understand it, sir, no. Q. You said in the beginning of your re-examination to-day that Mr. Melville had been under the influence of liquor some six times? — A. I said that it might have been six or it might not have been so many. Q. Was one of those times before the ship left San Francisco? — A. Yes, I think it was, one of them. Q. Were any of those after you were in Siberia on the travel home!— A. Yes, they were. 100 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. While you were with the Eussian officers'? — A. Yes. Q. How many times were there on the ship after she left San Fran- cisco that you saw Mr. Melville under the influence of liquor? — A. I don't remember of any. Q. Was there any time when you were on the ice and traveling to- gether that you saw Mr. Melville under the influence of liquor? — A. No, sir; not on the ice. Q. Now, you say that Kusmah had to come across the bay when he returned to Bulun to you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. In the meantime, while he had been gone, had not the water fallen and the ice broken up and run down the stream? — A. I do not under- stand you. Q. 1 say after he left you at Geeomovialocke to go to Bulun, and be- fore he returned, had not the ice in the river broken up ? — A. Not where we were, I don't think. Q. Had you heard that it had done so where he was? — A. He made that as an excuse to us, but I afterwards learned differently. Q. Well, he told you that, did he not? — A. That is what be told us. Q. Did you learn that such a thing as that did happen at the mouth of the Lena; that in the fall, when the ice was making, the river would fall and the ice would break and run out of the river and then it would freeze again? — A. I saw the river freeze up once, and it didn't act that way. I saw the river freeze up twice. It did not act that way either time. Q. You did not see it act that way. Did you hear from any other person than Kusmah that it did so act? — A. I did not. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. What do you mean when you say froze up twice? — A. I mean I saw it two different years. Q. The ice went out when the warm weather came? — A. Yes; the ice goes out in the spring when the floods come. By Mr. Arnoux: Q. Do you know Mr. Keefer, a friend of Mr. Melville's? — A. I have met the gentleman ; yes. Q. How recently have you met him ? — A. I saw him in the committee- room. Q. And before that? — A. At the Ebbitt House, on Friday evening. Q. Did you some two weeks ago apply to him to lend you money? — A. I did. Q. Did he loan it to you? — A. He did not, sir. Q. Have you since then been in communication with Dr. Collins about your testimony here ? — A. I have talked with him ; yes. Q. Has he given you any money? — A. Not here, sir. Q. Has he given you any money? — A. I borrowed fifty dollars fromj him. By Mr. Curtis : Q. You had to pay your expenses here ?— A. I did ; yes. Q. You have to maintain yourself while here ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You have no means of your own ? — A. Not at hand; no, sir. Q. Did Dr. Collins in any way, when he advanced you money for your] expenses to attend here as a witness, intimate, hint;, or insinuate in any] way what your evidence was to be? — A. Not a thing; no, sir. Q. And if it had not been for Dr. Collins advancing you the money] JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 101 for your expenses it would have been impossible to have got you here, would it not ? — A. I should have had to have walked. Q. Were you paid anything by the messenger who brought you the subpoena ? — A. No, sir ; I was not. Q. JSTow, something has been said here by the learned counsel on the other side about blackmail. I cannot conceive where that comes in. We are here at out own expense. I am speaking now of Dr. Collins. He has expended and will continue to expend money. Mr. BouTELLE. Dr. Collins, I understand, is supoenaed ? Mr. Curtis. Yes, he is subpoenaed. He is here at his own expense. He has spent money and will continue to spend money, if it beggars him, in order to have the truth known ; and Dr. Collins has no personal feeling or animosity against any living being. The only personal feel- ing he has is for the memory of his dead brother. If the other side has any evidence at all aflecting his brother's conduct during the expedi- tion, we challenge them to produce it; and any man in whatever capacity, under any circumstances, who says that Dr. Collins, or anybody in con- nection with him, has any object of blackmail, of character or of anything else, states that which is absolutely false in itself, and which must be known to him as false when uttered. Mr. Arnoux. I did not apply it to Dr. Collins, and did not mean it to be applied to Dr. Collins. The Chairman. Have you any more questions to ask? Mr. Curtis. Yes, sir. 1 make this statement. Dr. Collins is com- pelled to go into his own purse, and his brother is compelled to go into his own purse, in order to get justice done in this country. Mr. BouTELLE. I thought the House of Eepresentatives was sup- posed to pay the expense of these witnesses. Mr. Curtis. It may be reimbursed to Dr. Collins. I suppose it will. Mr. Boutelle. Does not the subpoena carry expenses with if? Mr. Curtis. Dr. Collins was not paid, and this man was not paid. In other words, we had to pay this man's expenses or lose his evidence. Mr. Collins. I will state, Mr. Chairman, that I met Mr. Bartlett in l^ew York, and he told me that he hadn't any money ; that it would be utterly impossible for him to go on to Washington to give his testimony until he heard from his home or from his brothers. And he asked would I loan him sufficient money to come on here. I said certainly I would, and did so. I handed Mr. Bartlett $50, at his request, for his expenses, and I find this in my memorandum book: ^'Loaned to Mr. Bartlett $50, to be repaid Apriri2th," when he should hear from home. Mr. Curtis. I need not say, perhaps, to this committee, that there is no man in this country, as a physician, as a professional gentleman, as a man of honor, who stands higher than Dr. Collins, of Minnesota. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Now, only one question : At Geeomovialocke, did you ever see any of the officers in a state of intoxication *? — A. No, sir; I did not. Q. Or at Bulun 1 — A. Well, I have seen them when I thought they had been drinking something, at Bulun. Q. Who was it ? — A. Mr. Danenhower, and Mr. Melville, also. Q. On how many occasions'? — A. I don't remember of more than one. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. What were the indications of their being intoxicated *? — A. Very talkative, and feeling or acting as all people do when they are under the influence of liquor. 102 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. Were they intoxicated to a degree that would incapacitate them for their dutyf — A. I don't think so. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. Were you intoxicated, also, at the same time 1 — A. No, sir. Q. Had you been drinking? — A. I don't think as much as they had. By Mr. Bou telle : Q. How would you gauge thaf? — A. (Laughing.) By my own feel- ings, I guess. William P. 0. Nindemann sworn and examined. By Mr. GURTIS : Question. What is your full name*? — Answer. My full name is Will- iam F. 0. Mndemann. Q. What countryman are you, if you please? — A. A German by birth. Q. What is your present occupation?— A. My present occupation is rigger in the New York navy-yard. Q. Have you been continuously in the employment of the Naval De- partment since your return from the Jeannette expedition ? — A. I have not, sir. Q. How long have you been in the employment of the Navy Depart- ment?— A. I have been there probably six months. Q. Were you ever attached to any other polar expedition than the one we are inquiring about? — A. I have, sir. Q. How many ? — A. Two. Q. What were they? — A. The Polaris and Tigress. Q. I believe it was you who saved the Polaris, was it not? — A. Well, I don't know whether I saved her or not, but I tied her at one time to an iceberg where she was in great danger, where the captain would not take the responsibility upon him to order me out. Q. You took that responsibility, and the ship was saved? — A. She was to a certain extent. She was lost afterwards. She was saved at that time. Q. You shipped on the Jeannette at San Francisco? — A. I did. Q. As matter of fact, the Jeannette was there fully fitted out, was it not ? — A. I don't knoAV whether she was very fully fitted out, but as far as my judgment went, at that time, probably she was. Q. In what, if anything, would you consider her fitting out defective ? — A. In the provisions and clothing. Q. To what extent was she deficient in that? — A. I could not say exactly, but I must say the provisions and clothing were not as good as we had in the Polaris. Q. Nor in as great quantity, were they ? — A. No, sir. Q. For how long was slie i)rovisioned at the time she was fitted out? A. I think she was provisioned for three years j supposed to be. Q. Said to be? — A. Said to be. Q. But in point of fact did she have provisions for that time ?— A. I think she had. Q, Then what gives you the opinion that she was not properly fitted out in regard to provisions? — A. Well, I think the provisions could have been better. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. Better in quality ? — A.. Better in quality. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 103 By Mr. Curtis : Q. More nutritious *? — A. Yes, in certain respects. What I mean to say is simply that we had better provisions and better clothing in the Polaris than in the Jeannette. Q. Then your general opinion is that in regard to the clothing and provisions she was not fitted out as well as the otlaer ship that you have mentioned ? — A. No, sir, she was not. Q. And of course the proper fitting out of the ship in relation to pro- visions and clothing was a very important factor, was it not •? — A. I should think it was. Q. Who had charge of the fitting out of the Jeannette"? — A. That is more than I can say ; I suppose Captain De Long had. Q. It was done under the orders of Captain De Long and the Navy Department ? — A. I suppose so. Q. To your knowledge, is it not true that Mr. Bennett gave orders to spare no expense in the fitting out of the Jeannette ? — A. That is what I heard, but I could not say exactly from whom. I am sure that Cap- tain De Long read out the telegram — I believe it was after we left San Francisco — stating that if anything should happen to any of the men that were married, Mr. Bennett would look out for their families as long as he lived ; that they would not be in want of anything ; aiid Captain De Long told us that therefore nobody should be afraid about their wives and families. We were called to quarters and that was read out to us. Q. But what I want to inquire of you is, did you not learn from Cap- tain De Long or from some other person in the expedition that Mr. Ben- nett had given orders prior to the sailing from San Francisco that no expense whatever was to be spared in fitting out the vessel properly "? — A. That I could not say for certain. The only thing that I know is what I got from the newspapers. Q. You were told that, were you not ? — A. I was not exactly told it, but I have seen that part of it in the newspapers. Q. In point of fact, the Naval Department, or rather Captain De Long, who was a naval officer, was he not? — A. I suppose so. Q. Had charge of the fitting out of the Jeannette at San Francisco ? — A. I think he had full charge, as far as my knowledge goes. Q. Have you any personal knowledge that the scientific instruments the party had for the observation of the weather, and so forth, were furnished by Mr. Bennett or paid for by him "? — A. No, I have not. Q. Now, Mr. Nindemann, I want as carefully as I can to avoid your testimony before the board of inquiry, and to confine you to the reso- lution that is before the committee.. You understand the art of navi- gation? — A. A little; not much. Q. If you have proper instruments, are you competent to tell about where you may be located when you are at sea or on an expedition of this character? — A. I could probably if I had a little practice, but I would not swear that I could do it now. Q. Well, it is well understood that navigators on these expeditions who understand the science of navigation, who understand the use of proper instruments, can tell about where they are if they possess the proper instruments ? — A. They can exactly ^ that is, within a few min- utes or a few seconds. Q. We will come down for the present to the moment of the separa- tion. I mean by the separation, when your party was divided into three boat's crews, one under Lieutenant Chipp, another under Captain 104 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. De Long, and the other under Chief Engineer Melville. Where were you then? — A. At Bennett Island j leaving Bennett Island, as far as I recollect. Q. Where is that? — A. Bennett Island is somewhere about 77, prob- ably a little above it, north, or probably a little below 77. Q. In the matter of day's journey, or a matter of Eussian versts, or English miles, are you able to state about the distance that would be from, say, Bulun? We will get a fixed point. — A. From Bulun, as near as I can remember, Bennett Island is in about 77, a little above, or a little below. I don't know exactly. If Bulun is anywhere near right on the chart, I think it is somewhere near about 8 degrees. Q. Now the object of this expedition was to seek the Pole, was it not? — A. As far as I understood it. Q. To penetrate what you have always understood to be the Polar sea, was it not ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. That is the impression and conviction that you navigators have ; that at the Pole there is an open sea? — A. Oh, no such thing; that is not my belief. Q. Well, what is it? — A. There is no such thing as an open Polar sea. Q. What is it? — A. An ice pack with leads of water in it. Q. Were you ever there ? — A. I was there ; yes, sir. Q. At the Pole? — A. No; not at the Pole. I don't know what the Pole is. All I know is that there is such a thing, or there is supposed to be such a thing. Nobody knows whether there is or not. Q. You do not know whether it is an open Polar sea or a vast solitude of ice with occasionally an open spaee of water ? — A. Leads, yes. As far as my experience goes as to its solidity there is no such thing as a solid pack, because if it is solid it don't move at all, but tbis ice is moving all winter and summer, and as near as I can come at it the ice moves in a circle. What ice can't get out keeps on circling around until it gets out. That is my idea about the Polar sea. Q. What is further your idea ? Is it your idea, for instance, that it is much warmer at the Pole than it was where the ship was locked in the ice? — A. No, sir ; that is not my idea, because it is a thing impossi- ble. How can it be warmer when there are six months' daylight and six months' darkness ? Q. Did you ever in the course of this expedition observe in this ice country flocks of birds flying northward ? — A. I did. Q. Now do you not know, as matter of fact, that the temperature is much more mild near the Pole than it is, for instance, at the spot where your ship was locked in the ice ? — A. That they have got to prove first. I don't think so, and never will believe it until I have more proof of it. Q. And you do not think that the great difficulty in reaching the Pole is to penetrate the vast seas of ice to the southward of it ; you do not think that is the chief obstacle ? The Witness. To the north ? Mr. Curtis. To the southward of the Pole. The Witness. I don't understand the question. Mr. Curtis. Very well ; you do not think that the only way Mr. BouTELLE (interposing). It would be all south, would it not ? Mr. Curtis. No ; in point of fact it is agreed now that the tempera- ture is much more warm at the Pole than south of the Pole, and that the great obstruction in reaching the Pole is not so much the extreme tem- perature of the climate at or near the Pole as it is south of the Pole, where these vast fields and mountains of ice are located. JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 105 Mr. BouTELLE. But I say, all the ice would necessarily be south of the Pole. Mr. Curtis. In point of fact it is, and it is on that theory I under- stand that many scientists base the belief of the possibility of an open Polar sea. Mr. BouTELLE. The point I think where the witness does not under- stand you is this: You use the term ^' south of the Pole.'V Of course everything is south of the Pole, because the Pole is north itself. You mean at a short distance south of the Pole. Mr. Curtis. That is what I mean. I won't spend any time on it. I suppose, before we are through, that point will be elucidated by practi- cal scientific people. The Witness. That idea of an open Polar sea comes from Dr. Kane. Dr. Kane never saw an open Polar sea. But Martin, his steward, who was afterwards second mate, went as far as Cape Constitution, where he saw an immense lot of open water, as he thought. At the time he saw this big space of open water it was a little foggy or hazy. He saw the point of Cape Constitution running to the eastward, and he had no boat and no sleigh, and he did not stay long enough for it to clear up. But he saw this fog and came back and told Captain Kane that be saw an open Polar sea. By Mr. CURTis : Q. That is in Kane's narrative'? — A. That is Kane's narrative. After- wards when we came up there with the Polaris we got into the same open water, and we thought for sure we were in the open Polar sea, but after steaming for seven or eight hours we found that we were in mov- ing ice. Q. I notice, in your evidence before the Board of Inquiry, you make reference occasionally to Wrangel Land. Where is Wr an gel Land? — A. Wrangel Land is located in about 73 or 74, I don't know exactly where. Q. On what coast? — A. Ou the Siberian coast ; somewhat off the Siberian coast, I don't know exactly how far. Q. In what way is it absolutely necessary that a person in order to reach the North Pole should go by Wrangel Land ? — A. I don't say that it is necessary to go by Wrangel Land. Q. Has it not been considered that that is not the correct route? — A. Well, that I can't say. My idea was at the time when I first heard of Wrangel Land that that land was a big continent that would extend to the Pole, until I found out differently. Q. Then in point of fact you knew of that before this last expedi- tion? — A. No, I did not know of this Wrangel Land before. I knew that there was such a thing as Wrangel Land, but I did not know how far it extended. Q. But you cannot assign to us any reason why an expedition in order to successfully penetrate to the pole should touch at or proceed to Wrangel Land, can you ? — A. No. The only idea I could give you is merely that Captain De Long thought Wrangel Land was a large conti- nent, and was near the pole. Q. And that was merely a matter of conjecture ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, as I understand you, you know of nothing in the experience of navigators who have endeavored to go to the pole that justifies you in the belief that in order to penetrate to the pole it is necessary to touch at or go to Wrangel Land? — A. No. They need not go to Wran- gel Land. They can go by the way of Greenland, and they can go by 106 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. way of Spitzberg. There are three ways of reaching the pole : by Green- land, Behring Strait, and Spitzberg or Franz Joseph Land. We don't know of any others. Q. I suppose you remember the fact that it was by the direction of Captain De Long that the ship was steamed into the ice, do you nof? — A. Yes, sir; that is, into a lead of open water. Q. The result of which was to incase the ship in ice, was it not? — A. That was the result of it. Q. And the result of it was it incased the ship in ice, and the ship after floating with the drift iinally sank, did it not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now did it not strike you before the Board of Inquiry, and did not you so testifythat on the theory that Captain De Long desired to make for Wrangel Land it was proper for him to put the ship in that position ? — A. I did. Q. And was it not on the theory that Captain De Long thought It necessary to go to Wrangel Land that you justified his putting the ship in that position ? — A. I suppose I did at that time ; that he thought he would reach Wrangel Land. That was his idea of reaching it. Q. But if it was not necessary, or if it was a matter of experiment or mere judgment in order to penetrate to the pole to visit Wrangel Land, you would not consider an officer justified in putting his ship in such a perilous position, would you "? — A. It is hard to tell, because you can tell nothing any further than you go. This was my first time up there, and I can't tell much about it more than I have seen. Probably if I could go up there now I would know better. Q. So that there would be no doubt about this fact ? You do not de- sire to change your evidence before the Board of Inquiry in which you stated that if Captain De Long's desire was to go to Wrangel Land he was justified in i^utting his ship in that perilous position ? — A. He was, to a certain extent. Of course, you can't tell. I say, for instance, you are in open water, and have plenty of open water all around you. Probably in half an hour you would have ice all around you. Q. Now, I would like to have your opinion on this. If it was not necessary, in order to prosecute the purijoses of your journey that you should visit Wrangel Land, then yoii would not justify the putting of the ship in a dangerous position for that purpose, would you '? — A. No, probably not. Q. Now, this ship was locked up in the bosom of the ice for how long ? — A. Twenty-two months, I think. Q. For nearly two years. Did you ever know a shii) under like cir- cumstances to l3e extricated? — A. No. Q. And so far as your knowledge of those expeditions is concerned, and so far as your information extends, was it ever known that a ship that was permitted to be locked up or incased in ice in that way was ever extricated! — A. Well, I think it was. Q. Which one? — A. I think it was the Franklin expedition, if I am not mistaken. Q. Was not Franklin's fate brought about by that? — A. Yes, he lost his sliip through it, but he couldn't tell when he went up there that he was going to lose his ship. Q. ] understann did you take'? — A. Well, our course was south. The only thing we could go by was a little chart. I didn't have a compass or a watch. All I had was a little chart. Q. Did you take any compasses from the ship? — A. A few. Q. What became of them? — A. Captain De Long had a compass with him, one of these surveying compasses. Q. Did he leave any compasses on the shij)? — A. Yes ; all except these surveying compasses. Q,. Could he not have taken the others? — A. I suppose he could. Q. Were they not more perfect instruments ! — A. Yes, for fine work. Q. Would you not have been better able to discover your course or where you w^ere if you had taken those compasses you left behind? — A. On water p^^obably we would. Q. On land? — A. On land these other compasses were good enough. Q. But not as good as the others. — A. No, sir ; not on water. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. What is the difference between these compasses? — A. One is the kind used on land and the other at sea. Q. Did they take no compasses in the boat? — A. They took a survey- ing compass. Q. Why did they take that? — A. I don't know; but Captain De Long gave as the reason that he thought these compasses w^ere good enough. By Mr. Arnoux: Q. Were they not lighter in weight? — A. Probably. By Mr. Curtis: Q. You traveled in a southerly direction. When did you fall in with Chief Engineer Melville? — A. i fell in with Chief Engineer Melville September 2, 3, or 4. There is a dispute betw^een me and Mr. Melville about one date. Q. You fell in with Chief Engineer Melville September 2, 3, or 4 where? — A. In Bulun. Q. How did you get to Bulun ; were you aided to get there by the natives ; did they give you any information ? — A. No, sir ; I wanted to go to Bulun. Q. You were making for Bulun yourself? — A. Yes, sir. Q. On the way did you meet with any natives ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did or did they not give you any information in regard to Engineer Melville?— A. No, sir. Q. And it was not until you arrived at Bulun that you met Melville ? — A. 1 didn't have any idea about Melville or his party until I saw them. Q. But you are quite sure that you saw them at Bulun on the 2d, 3d, or 4th of September? — A. Yes, sir; I made a mistake — I meant the month of November. Q. You did not meet Chief Engineer Melville until the 9th of No- vember?— A. Until the 2d, 3d, or 4th of November. Q. How did you fix your time ? — A. From the time I left Captain De Long and then traveled back. Q. Well, how did you fix that time? JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 115 The Witness. What do you mean ? Mr. Curtis : What I mean is this : How did j^ou fix the day of the month and the time of the day when you left Captain De Long ; how CO you fix the first day of the month? — A. Cai)tain De Long kept a journal. Q. Is that the only way you fix it? — A. Yes. Q. The only way you fix it now is that you have seen an entry in Captain De Long's journal? — A. That is the way we kept the run of it. Q. Do you know yourself anything about it ? The Witness. That it was the 9th of October ? Mr. Curtis. Yes. A. Yes ; because when Erichsen died, which was on the 6th, the cap- tain told me to have a board cut out, with the date he died and his name on it ; on the 7th we left the hut, and on the 9th I left Captain De Long. Q. How did you know as matter of fact that it was on the 6th that Erichsen died ? — A. As far as the fact is concerned, I could not say for a fact. Q. That is what I want to get at. Have you any way by which you can possibly fix the date on which Erichsen died ? Mr. BouTELLE (interposing). Let me ask the witness one or two questions. Mr. Curtis. Certainly. By Mr. Boijtelle : Q. You say that you remember that Erichsen died on the 6th of Oc- tober?— A. The 6th of October. Q. And that you marked that, or it was marked on the slab ? — A. Yes ; on a piece of board. The board is in Washington now. Q. How do you understand that Captain De Long or anybody else knew that it was the 6th of October ; by keeping 'a record from day to day ?— A. By keeping a record. That was all. Q. That is your best recollection of thdt time ? — A. That is the only way I could tell. By Mr. Curtis : Q. That is the only recollection you have on that point — what you gathered from Captain De Long? — A. That is all. Q. Now, since this inquiry has been begun, have you seen the journal of Captam De Long ? — A. I saw it when we found it, but as far as look- ing through it or anything of that kind is concerned, I never did. Q. Noros was with vou, you say, when vou commuDicated with Mel- ville?— A. Yes. Q. Did you go with Melville in search of De Long ? — A. No, sir. Q. You told Engineer Melville where you had left him, did you ?— A. As near as I could. Q. At the time you left De Long, you told De Long where you w^re going ? — A. He told me where I had to go to. Q. Then he knew were you were going ? — A. Whether he knew it for a certainty I don't know. Q. He told you where to go ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Then he knew where you were trying to go, did he not ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You told Engineer Melville where you had left De Long, did you not ? — A. About as near as I could. Q. You gave him the direction ? — A. Yes, sir. 116 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. Of course you have no knowledge of tlie exact time of the death of Captain De Long ; you know nothing about it 1 — A. No, sir. Q. But supposing, for instance, that an expedition had been started from Bulun on the IGth of October, or supposing it had been started on the 13th, how long would it have taken that expedition to have gone to the spot where De Long was found, supposing they traveled with all the facilities, in teams; what was the distance in days? — A. As far as my knowledge goes the distance from Bulun to Ku-mark-Surk is 100 versts. That is what I got from the natives. I know it takes two days to make it with a reindier team. But we didn't travel right straight along ; we only traveled about five hours a day. That was all. Q. We will leave that subject for the present. I do not ask you to state anything that you do not know of your own knowledge, but I want to know if you were not aware of a difference between Mr. Collins and Captain De Long, whatever it was? — A. The only thing I know about that is merely that there was a hard feeling between them. That I know by observation. But what it was about I don't know. Cap- tain De Long never spoke to me about it, but Mr. Collins told me at one time that he was put off' duty. Q. Where was this? — A. When wo went into winter quarters; when we first went into the ice. Q. From the time Collins was suspended or put off' duty, did you ever notice anything about the conduct or demeanor of Collins that was not of a gentlemanly character? — A. I never did. Mr. Collins was a perfect gentleman. Q. Did you ever know of his treating his superior officers or the sea- men in any way but that of a gentleman? — A. No, sir; he never did. He always treated them like gentlemen as far as I saw. Q. Did he complain to you that he had been suspended by Captain De Long? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And did he appear to be very sensitive about it? — A. Yes; it seemed to hurt his feelings. Q. Did he tell you that they had taken from him at different times his instruments? — A. That he did not state. Q. Do you know as a matter of fact that they did ?— A. That I don't know. They must have taken away his instruments, because I did not see him taking any more observations. Q. You did not see him taking any more observations after his sus- j)ension? — A. No, sir. Q. Before his suspension did he use to take the observations ? — A. Yes, and some of the other gentlemen, the captain, and so on. Q. After he was suspended no more observations were taken? — A. Not by Mr. Collins. Q. By the ship's officers? — A. Yes, they were. Q. Were they taken with the same instruments Collins used to use? — A. As ffir as I know. Q. Who made the observations after the suspension of Mr. Collins ? — A. 1 think it was Captain De Long, the doctor, and Chief Engineer Melville. Q. Those three?— A. Yes. Q. No one outside of those ? — A. Not that I know of. I think at one time Mr. Dunbar took some. I would not say that for certain. It ap- X^ears to me that he did. Q. Was Collins restored to duty, to your knowledge, before his death ? — A. Not that I know of. Q. He was in your party up to the time that you left De Long to go to JEANTETTE INQUIRY. - 117 Bulun ? — A. He was in our party from the time we lost the ship until I left him with De Long. Q. He was alive when you left him? — A. Yes. Q. And up to the moment when you left him he had not been re- stored to duty? — A. Not to my knowledge, he was not. Q. What period of time did that cover? — A. It covered, I guess, about two years, almost. Q. That he was suspended from duty ? — A. Yes ; he was suspended when we first went on the ice, as far as my knowledge goes. Q. And during that entire period he was never restored to duty? — A. Not as far as I know. Q. Now, when you found Collins, who examined his body ? — A. Bart- lett and me. Q. Had Collins ever told you that he had written a journal of all the proceedings of this expedition ? — A. He did after he was put oft' duty. He said he was going to keep notes. I asked him one day if he was keeping a journal. He said no, he had knocked off* keeping a journal, and that he just made notes now. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. Did Collins say to you that he was keeping a complete journal of this expedition or that he had kept it ? — A. That he had, but that he had knocked off, and was just keeping little notes now. Q. You understood that he kept a journal up to that time? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And had then ceased keeping a journal and was simply keeping notes ? — A. Yes, sir. Q„ Why was that ? — A. I don^t know. Q. He did not say ? — A. No, sir ; he didn't give me any reason. By Mr. Curtis . Q. But he told you that he was keeping notes of the entire exi)edi- tion ? — A. That is what he said. Q. When his body was searched for the papers, or for whatever was upon it, who was it made the search ? — A. Bartlett and me. Q. What papers did you find upon him ? — A. I think it was a little note-book and some pieces of paper all crushed together. Q. Hid you examine those ? — A. No, sir. Q. A note-book. What do you mean by a note-book? — A. One of these little note-books about that size and about that wide [illustrating]. Q. Did you ever see it afterwards? — A. I don't know whether I did or not. Q. AVhat became of what you took off his person ? — A. It was turned in to Mr Melville. Q. Did you ever see these crumpled pieces of i)aper afterwards ? — A. I saw them afterwards when they were all packed. Whatever was found upon him was all bundled up together. Mr. Melville wrote Mr. Collins's name on a piece of paper and stuck it into a handkerchief to know whose it was. Q. After they came into the hands of Melville did you ever see these crumpled pieces of paper ? — A. I don't know that I did. Q. Do you know where they are now ? — A. No, sir. Q. After these things came into the possession of Melville, did you ever see them, or do you know now where what you call the note-book is ? — A. No, sir J I never saw them. Q. Was that all that was found on his body at that time? — A. I think it was. 118 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. Are you quite sure ? — A. Yes, sir; that is, I wouldn't swear to it What this note book and these other papers were I don't know. I couldn't swear how many ineces there were or anything of the kind. By Mr. BOUTELLE : Q. Did you ever see Collins's diary or journal? — A. No, sir; I never did. Q. Did he ever show you any? — A. Ko. sir; 1 used to go down to see Mr. Danenhower once in a while, and I used to see a big book lying on his desk when passing through the room. By Mr. Curtis: Q. He never spoke to you of the journal he was keeping ? — A. No, sir. I was always on my own hook. When there was nothing going on, most of the time I was out of the ship. Q. Who obtained for you your present position? — A. Captain Meade. Q. On whose recommendation? — A. By my own, as far as I know. Q. Were you recommended either by Mr. Melville or Lieutenant Danenhower? — A. Not that T know of. I think all I have got I have to thank these other people for. 1 don't know as I have to thank Mr. Melville or Mr. Danenhower for what 1 got. By Mr. Boutelle: Q. Were you ever in the regular service before? — A. Not in the regular service. I was in the Jeannette and the St. Mary's. Q. When were you in the St. Mary's ?— A. Before I went into the Jeannette. Q. That is the naval service? — A. Not strictly the naval service. Q. It is a training ship? — A. A training ship. By Mr. Curtis: Q. In your examination before the court of inquiry this question was put to you: Have you any personal knowledge of any difficulty at any time between Mr. Col- ins and any officer of tlie Jeannette ? If so, state what you know about the matter. Did you have any knowledge of any difficulty between them ? — A. Only what I have stated. Q. Did you state that before the Board of Inquiry? — A. I don't know whether I did or not. Q. Did you state at any time before the Board of Inquiry what you stated here to-day — that there was any difficulty between Mr. Collins and Captain De Long, or that Mr. Collins had told you of any such difficulty? Did you make that statement to the Board of Inquiry at all ? — A. I don't think I did, because the questions were put to me so that I could get out of it, by the way it looked to me. No ; I don't think I did. Q. It was as true then as it is now ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And you certainly knew it then as well as you do now ? — A. I don't know whether I did. Probably I have studied it up a little more since. Mr. Boutelle. What answers of the witness to-day are your ques- *tions now referring to ? Mr. Curtis. I ask him did he state before the Board of Inquiry at any time in answer to any question anything that he has stated here in reference to his knowledge of the difficulty between Collins and De Long. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 119 Mr. BouTELLE. Has he stated anything here to-day about that ex- cept that he was suspended ? Mr. Curtis. Yes. He stated that CoUins complained to him that he had been suspended, and that he knew, without knowing the real cause, except from Collins, that there was an ill feeling between them. Mr. BouTELLE. I did not catch that. The Witness. Yes; I stated that there was an ill-feeling between Mr. Collins and the captain. Mr. Curtis. Now, I ask if he made any such statement as he made to-day before the Court of Inquiry"? The Witness. I said no, sir ; I did not, because at that time it was left open, with the statement that if I had any further statements to make I could do so at any time. Mr. BouTELLE. I do not see that the witness is drawn into any par- ticular difficulty here. I find in the record of the Court of Inquiry this : State, if you know, how Mr. Collins was treated by the commanding and other officers of the crew of the Jeannette. The Witness. As far as I know he was always treated like a gentleman ; as far as I know he was treated like an officer. He was respected hy every man on board the ship as an officer. State, if you know, how Mr. Collins treated the commanding and other officers of the Jeannette. The Witness. That is a question I cannot answer, sir. That I do not know. He simply states now that there was some ill-feeling between those two officers. Mr. Curtis. My object is not to reflect upon the witness at all, but to show, as in the case of Bartlett, that no attempt was made whatever in the Court of Inquiry to brittg out this difficulty. Mr. Boutelle. Perhaps they did not deem that one of the objects of the inquiry. Mr. Curtis. That I cannot say. It certainly went to the manage- ment of the expedition. Mr. Boutelle. I should not think so. I should be very sorry to have any naval operation of the war judged by the fact whether or not there was any ill-will between the officers in the ward-room or steerage mess. Mr. Curtis. That is a true proposition, and I think I will be able to satisfj^ you when all this evidence is in that this expedition could not be successful owing to the feeling between these two officers. The res- olution is to inquire into the causes. Mr. Boutelle. Anything that can show the nature of the ill-will that existed, or its effect, is proper, of course. But the fact that a wit- ness on a former trial did not state that there was ill-will between two officers, when he was not asked it, does not seem to me to be of any particular importance. Mr. Curtis. I am not trying to affect the credibility of this witness by that. On the contrary, I am trying to show that he had the same knowledge as Bartlett, but that in this Court of Inquiry, which has been eulogized so highly, questions were not put that brought out this matter. Mr. Boutelle. No, and they were not for the reasorr, I should judge, that questions seem to have been put which would bring out the facts important to that inquiry ; that is, how Collins was treated by the offi- cers, and how Collins treated the other officers. Now, the witness may not have had any knowledge as to what Captain De Long was in the habit of doing after breakfast, or what Collins might have done in the afternoon. It does not follow that the court of inquiry omitted any- thing essential. 120 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Mr. Curtis. I am tryiDg to reconcile bis testimony here with his testimony there. The questions were not really asked ; his attention was not called to that. I am not trying to attack the credibility of the witness. Now we think that the arrest and suspension of this man, going out there in the capacity he did, was in itself a grievance of the highest character. Mr. BouTELLE. If you start out with that proposition you certainly cannot carry any one with you until you have established the fact that the suspension was unjustifiable and therefore a wrong. It is a mani- fest absurdity to assume that the suspension of an officer by a superior is in itself a wrong. Mr. Curtis. It is a still more manifest absurdity to assume that a superior officer, without just cause, has a right to suspend an officer. Mr. BouTELLE. Ah, there is just where the point comes. Now. if we are to try this case as to the exercise of De Long's authority, the evidence will come in. But the mere statement of the fact — and that was the cause of my first interposition in the case — the mere statement of the fact of suspension as in itself a wrong or outrage, will not hold water. I have been the commanding officer of a vessel, I have been a subordinate officer of a vessel, and there is no propriety in assuming that the suspension of an officer from duty is necessarily a wrong. Mr. Curtis. I do not say that, and I do not wish to be understood as saying that. I say that so far as this record is concerned I am will- ing to take the memoranda of Captain DeLong; that if he suspended that man who was sent there for a specific purpose on the puerile, boyish ground that is contained in those memoranda (and that is all the record we have), then it was either the most flagrant exercise and abuse of au- thority Mr. Boutelle (interposing). Do you want this committee to i)ass upon that! Mr. Curtis. That is what you are going to pass ui>on. Mr. Boutelle. Then you will have to present the evidence. Mr. Curtis. But you cannot build a house in a minute. We have got to dig the cellar first. The Chairman. You can proceed with the examination. By Mr. Curtis : Q. I believe as matter of fact you were put under arrest, but you were not continued under arrest any length of time, were you? — A. About an hour or so. That is, I don't know whether I was released from arrest or not, but I was told to go ahead with my work, to pick up my load and take the lead. Q. At the time you left De Long with Noros to go in search of Mel- ville, do you know how much provisions the party had, if any? — A. They didn't have any. Q. How long had they been out of provisions'? — A. They had been without anything to eat for two days ; that is, what T would call any- thing to eat. Q. At this time that you left his company had you a shotgun? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you have an ax, even ? — A. No, sir ; we had a hatchet. We carried a couple of hatchets. I don't know whether we had an ax or not. Q. If you had had a shotgun, could you have shot some game? — A. Probably we could have shot some ptarmigans. Q. What are those?— A. Birds. JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 121 Q. Their flesli is eatable, is it not?— A. Yes, sir. Q. And palatable, is it not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. So that if you had possessed a solitary shotgun, with ammunition, you could have supplied the immediate necessities of the party for some days by ptarmigans! — A. No, sir, I don't think we could j there wasn't that many. Q. Did you count them ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know how many there were? — A. No, sir. Q. Are there not animals in that portion of the world? — A. Some- times. Q. In point of fact did you not often see flying over your head on that retreat flocks and flocks of birds going north? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You could have slain thousands, could you not? — A. Not at that time on the retreat, no, sir. The only time we saw birds was at Bennett Island. We killed them with stones. Mr. Newcomb shot some. Q. You had no ax, had you? — A. I don't know whether we had or not; we had a hatchet in our boat. I don't know what the rest of the boats had. Q. You had no axe with which to cut wood for fuel? — A. No, sir; there were no trees growing there. Mr. BouTELLE. What time are you questioning him about? Mr. Curtis. lam questioning him about the time he left De Long. Mr. BoTJTELLE. After he had left De Long? Mr. Curtis. After he left De Long, and he left De Long seven or eight miles from the vicinity of the spot where he w^as found. Now^ my friend (Mr. Arnoux) has been taking some laughing-gas today; he says there are no trees in that country. Mr. Arnoux. I say that there are no trees in that delta. Mr. Curtis. Is there no brush-wood there of any kind? Mr. Arnoux. We are talking about trees. Mr. Curtis. Well, you may call it brush-wood. Mr. Arnoux. There is no such thing as trees on that delta. It is north of the tree line. Mr. Curtis. Not a bit of it. Mr. Arnoux. We will take the word of the witness. Mr. Curtis. On that subject? I do not. Mr. BouTELLE. So far as where they were is concerned, he would know what he saw. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Now do you pretend to tell me that there was nothing at or near the spot where De Long was found capable of being used for fuel? — A. Yes, there was. Q. What was it?— A. Drift-wood. Q. What does drift-wood come from ? — A. That is wood that comes down the Lena. Q. Down the Lena from the north, does it not ? — A. No, sir ; from the south. When the snow and ice melt on the river bank it tears trees out of the ground, and when the water gains considerable force it car- ries this wood out on the delta and lands it there. Q. You say on this spot, or near the spot where De Long was found, there was no brush-wood or anything of that sort ? — A. No, sir ; the only brush-wood there was Arctic willow. You can call it brush-wood. Q. Is not that capable of being used for fuel ? — A. It is when dry. It runs along the ground. 122 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. How large does it grow ! — A. Some of it you find no thicker than your thumb. It runs along the ground. By Mr. Curtis : Q. And it is very good fncl "? — A. Sometimes it is. Q. And in order to use it for fuel in its wet state you have to cut it? — A. You can i)ull that up. There is no need of cutting that. Q. Can you pull it all up? — A. There is no need of cutting it any- how, because you can find drift- wood. Q. I am not speaking of that. Counsel says there is nothing in the nature of a tree. — A. You can call this whatever you have a mind to. It is in the nature of a tree. You can call it a shrub. Q. Are not many of them the size of your wrist? — A. They might be in some places ; that is, after you get a little farther south. Q. How did you gather these Arctic willows that you speak of? — A. We did not gather them for firewood ; we only gathered them to make tea out of. Q. Uow did you gather them ? — A. Just cut them off with our kniv^es. Q. You did not use any hatchet for that purpose? — A. No, sir; as far as trees are concerned, the first trees we saw were in Tit Arrii Isl- and ; that is on the delta; but a little to the north of tbat there were trees. Q. That is probably as far north as this place you were speaking of ?— A. Probably 30 miles farther. Q. You saw trees growing there ?— A. Yes. Q. Then you saw trees north of that latitude? — A. I saw them when we went home by the way of Werchojansk. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. If I understand you aright, no matter where you sailed, if you at- tempt to go to the North Pole you come to ice 5 is that correct ? — A. That is correct so far as my knowledge goes. Q. There is a belt of ice which separates the Pole from civilization? — A. Well, I don't know whether you call it a belt of ice or what it is; but I should not call it a belt. What I understand by a belt is a thing without being broken. I say there is no such thing as that. I say the ice is broken all the year around. Q. But this ice is filled with seams? — A. With what we call leads. You get into them, get caught and released, and get on farther north. Q. Is there any certainty for any one going up through Behring Strait to go north without getting into the pack ? — A. No, there is no certainty. Q. Is it not inevitable that, some time or other, a vessel trying to go north must go into the pack? — A. They must go into the ice; that is, into leads of open water. Q. And in winter time do not the loads of open w^ater freeze over? — A. Yes, they will open and they will freeze. Q. Now, is it not your judgment, from your knowledge of Arctic ex- I)loration, that if you can get to land, and if that land extfuids north, you will get farther north on the land than you would on the water?— A. Yes, in certain latitudes. Q. But I say up there. If W^rangel Land did extend as a continent up to the Pole, would it not be easier to go to the Pole on the Iniid tlian it would be on the water? — A. Not if you can find leads thick enough. Q. Is it likely you would find leads that would take you all the w^y JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 123 tip to the Pole? — A. That is pretty hard to tell. 1 have known times on the Polaris when we thought we never would get through. Q. No one has ever been able to find leads that have carried them all the way up to the Pole? — A. No, sir; they never will. Q. Is Wrangel Land a good place to spend the winter? — A. That is more than I can tell. Q. In your judgment would it have been a wise course to adopt to winter on land if you found any land far enough north? — A. Certainly. Q. Did you not understand that that was Captain De Long^s pur- pose w^hen he tried to reach Wrangel Land? — A. That is more than I can tell. Q. Do you not know, that he proposed to make that his winter quarters ? — A. Not for a certainty ; I only know he wanted to reach it if he could; that is what he told me with his own mouth, but I could not say it was his intention to winter there. Q. Well, he was trying to reach it at the beginning of the winter, was he not? — A. Yes; he tried to get there. Q. Did you ever, in all this matter that you speak of as hard feeling between De Long and Collins know of Captain De Long treating Mr. Collins in any improper or ungentlemanly manner? — A. That I could not say. Q. You never knew of any such thing? — A. I never knew of any such thing; if you want my judgment on that matter Q. (Interposing.) I did not ask for your judgment, I asked you whether you saw anything yourself. — A. No; I could not say I saw anything. Q. Did you ever know any officer or man to be treated with outrage or indignity? — A. No. Q. Were any questions put to you while you were before the Court of Inquiry? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many ? — A. I don't know. Q. About how many? — A. I couldn't tell you. Q. More than a half a dozen?— A. I couldn't say. Q. More than three? — A. I couldn't say. Of course I didn't keep any run of them. Q. Did you find that they were all put down on the record? — A. I suppose they were. I haven't looked at the record. Q. Then I will look and see in regard to that. How frequently did Mr. Collins talk to you about Captain De Long's relieving him from duty? — A. Only once that I know of; probably twice. Q. When you left the ship were you divided into three crews or into five par(s?-^A. When we left the ship I think we were divided into five tents, each officer in charge of a difierent tent. Q. Do you know how many were in the tent with Captain De Long? — A. Yes, I suppose I could remember. [After a pause.] Captain De Long, Dr. Ambler, Mr. Collins, Alexy, and myself, at the first dividing oft' when we started. Q. Who were in the second tent?— A. I couldn't remember that. I didn't take notice of it. Q. In whose command was the second tent? — A. Mr. Chipp's. Q. And how many men did he have with him ? — A. I don't know how many there were. I haven't figured it up. Q. Who was in the third party ? — A. I think Mr. Melville had charge of a tent, and the doctor had charge of a tent, and Mr. Danenhower had (jliarge of a tent for some time. 124 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. Then, Dr. Ambler had charge of another tent, you sayf— A. Yes. Q. That would make the fourth tenf? — A. Yes. Q. And Lieutenant Danenhower had charge of the fifth tent ? — A. Yes. Q. And that is the way you were first divided '? — A. Yes. Q. And that continued until you were ready to leave Bennett Island, did it not 1 — A. I think it did; 1 am not quite certain of that. Q. Now, in your judgment, did you take as much material in provis- ions and clothing and supplies as you were able to transport over the ice? — A. I don't think we could have transported much more. Q. And was it not the purpose and intent, in your judgment, to take all that you could with safety to yourselves *? — A. I suppose so. Q. Suppose, instead of taking the two cutters, you had taken the heavy whale-boat ; do you think that the party would have been able to have dragged the additional boat to Bennett Island ? — A. Well, that is pretty hard to tell. Dragging so much as we did, I suppose we could have dragged her, too, if it came to the pinch. Q. Do you not think it would have delayed you 1 — A. Of course it would have delayed us. Q. And if you had been delayed much longer would you not have been too late to have reached the Siberian coast ; would not the new ice have prevented your coming to the shore ? — A. Yes, we would have been too late ; we were too late as it was. Q. If you could have been earlier would not that have increased very much the chance of all escaping with their lives 1 — A. Certainly. Q. Can you tell me when you were in the tents and when you were on the shore in what order the different ones were served ? — A. I never troubled my head about the meals. Q. When you were in the tents *? — A. At the first going off I served out. 1 didn't call it serving out ; I just put it on the ice and everybody could help themselves. Captain De Long relieved me from that after- wards. Q. Did Captain De Long ever help the different ones? — A. No. Q. When you were in the tents on the delta how did you sleep— to- gether? — A. We slept all together the best we could. We didn't sleep much ; laid alongside the fire most of the time^ Q. Was there any difference in the treatment of one from another, or were they all exactly on an equality? — A. All exactly on an equality. As far as I know one did not get more than another. The only thing was that me and another man were compelled to lay alongside the fire. We didn't have room enough under the canvas and we couldn't get un- der the canvas; we had to be outside of it. Q. And was Mr. Collins always inside the tent? — A. We didn't have any tent; it was a i)iece of canvas. By Mr. Boutelle: Q. You just laid it over you? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Put sticks under it? — A. Yes, sir. At the first starting out we had two tents; then we found we had too much, and we carried back some of the records and lett one tent, and when we found one tent was not big enough we cut it in two parts for fourteen men, seven under one i)art and seven under another. Q. Why did you leave the other tent? — A. Because it was too heavy. By Mr. Arnoux: Q. As I understand, from time to time, as ^ou found you were get- JEANNETTE INQUIEY. 125 ting too much of a load, you left things behind*? — A. We left things behind. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Did you ever state to anybody that Melville did wrong in not trying to help De Long before he did*? — A. I don't know whether I did or not. Q. I want to know 1 — A. I don't remember that I made such a state- ment. What I probably said was that he probably could have done so. Q. Will you swear that you never made that statement? — A. I say that I don't know anything about Melville's affairs. In the first i^lace, I couldn't know anything about Melville's affairs. I wasn't along with him. Q. This is a plain question, and it is capable of a plain answer. Did you state to anybody that Melville did wrong in not trying to help De- Long before he did? — A. Not that I know of. Q. Will you swear that you never made that statement ? — A. No, I would not, because I don't know whether I did or not. I might have done it and might not, but not to my remembrance. Q. And if you did make that statement, w^as it true! — A. I could not swear to that because I never knew what circumstances Mr. Mel ville was in, only what I heard from other people. I might have said that I thought it was not right that we should leave Bulun v^^ithout making any further search. I might have said that when we were going on to Yakoutsk. Q. Do you now say that Melville did wrong in not trying to help De Long before he did ? — A. That I can't say. I can^t say yes or no to that. I am not enough of a judge to decide that, because I don't know any- thing about the man's circumstances. I don't know anything about the circumstances that Mr. Melville or any of his i>arty were in. Q. You don't know whether or not you ever made that statement that I have asked j^ou to other people! — A. As I said before, I might have said that it was not right for us to leave Bulun without making further search. Q. How soon did the water freeze after the ship got into the open lead of water? The Witness. Do you mean the boats or the ship ? Mr. Curtis. I mean exactly what I say. How soon did the water freeze after the ship got into the open lead of water? The Witness. You mean when we first entered the lead? Mr. Curtis. How soon did the water freeze and become ice? The Witness. At what time? Mr. Curtis. At the time I mention to you, after the ship got into the open lead of water. A. As far as that is concerned the ice was making the next day, but not enough to hurt anything. Q. At the time you went in there young ice was making? — A. Yes. Q. Five or six inches thick? — A. No. Q. Did you not say so before the Board of Inquiry ? — A. Not the next day — not for the first night. Q. How soon did the water freeze or the ice collect after the ship got into the open lead of water? The Witness. I do not understand the question. Mr. BouTELLB. What do you mean by open lead of water? Mr. Curtis. When they were trying to make Wrangel Land thev went into this particular lead of ice in this particular direction. 126 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Mr. BOUTELLE. Went from the open water among the ice? Mr. Curtis. Yes, sir; the ice there entombed them, and the vessel never got out of it. Now, the question that I ask him is a very simple one: How soon did the ice begin to form? Mr. BouTELLE. Around the ship? Mr. Curtis. Certainly. Mr. BoUTELLE. After she entered the pack? Mr. Curtis. After she entered this open lead. Mr. BouTELLE. This open lead in the pack? Mr. Curtis. With the pack about them, certainly. A. The ice formed the next day, if I remember right. Adjourned. Washington, D. C, Tuesday, April 8, 1884. The subcommittee met at 10.30 a. m., all the members thereof being present and counsel on either side. William F. C. Nindemann resumed the stand, and his examination was continued as follows: By Mr. Curtis : Question. (Submitting a map.) Will you be kind enough to look at that map and state if you have seen it or a similar one before? — An- swer. I saw here in Washington, after I returned from the expedition, a map similar to that. Q. That is, I believe, the latest circumpolar map or chart showing the course of the Jeannette? — A. I believe so; at least, I was told so by a gentleman in the Navy Department — Commodore Walker, I think his name is. Q. Will you be kind enough to point out on that map that imaginary continent — Wrangel Land — which was thought to extend to the Pole ? — A. (Indicating.) That is the land there. Q. That is Wrangel Land, is it? — A. That is the land called Wrangel Laud. Q. It is an island, is it not ? — A. It is an island as far as I know. Q. As far as is known; and it occupies that space on the map [in- dicating]. Now, will you be kind enough to tell me on what theory, if any possible theory, Wrangel Land was, could be, or can be essential in the journey to the Pole? — A. I don't know whether I could or not. Q. Well, can jou? — A. I cannot. Q. Can anybody? — A. I don't know whether anybody can or not. I don't think there is anybody that could. Q. It was, however, in the effort, as you understand it, to get to Wrangel Land that the shii> was put into the lead of water in the ice in which she was finally incased and bound. Is that so? — A. Yes, as far as my knowledge goes. Q. Exactly. Now, will you be kind enough to look at that map and state the dift'erence, if there is one, and if you can calculate it, between the spot where the Jeannette was lost and the nearest point to the Sibe- rian coast at which aid and succor were possible? By the Siberian coast I do not mean the delta of the Lena. — A. I don't know whether I could give exactly the nearest point. Q. I will put the question in another way. Look at that map and tell me if you had been under proper guidance, management, and con- JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 127 trol, assisted by proper instruments, had possession of proper compasses to know where you were, if you could not have reached aid and safety on the Siberian coast after a journey of about three hundred niiles"^ Mr. Arnoux. I submit that that involves the very inquiry that wc are here for. How can he say whether they were proper or improper? I submit that that question assumes that which has not been proved. Mr. McAdoo. I think the committee are satisfied with the question. It is a hypothetical question entirely. Ordinarily it might happen that a witness might have to be led up to a question like that, but under the circumstances I think the question a proj^er one. A. Well, it is a pretty hard thing to say, but if you want my judg- ment or what I thought of it at the time, after we left Companion Isl- and, after we passed the IS'ew Siberian Islands, there was plenty of water to the southward, and as far as my knowledge goes we sighted another island and we went to the southwest. Q. I will ask you another question. I will put it this way: Is it not from where the Jeannette was lost in a line nearly due south to the Siberian coast, about three hundred miles'? — A. Probably it is, more or less. Q. Well, it is in that neighborhood? — A. It is about that. Q. Is it not from where the Jeannette was lost to that portion of the Siberian land, the delta where De Long was lost and his body found, twice that distance — yes or no I — A. I think it is. Q. In traveling due south, instead of southwest as you did travel, would you not have kept advancing towards civilization, aid, and suc- cor in Siberia? — A. If we had steered a little to the southwestward I think we would. Q. Now, how long did you delay at Bennett Island?— A. Eight days, I think it was. Q. For what purpose? — A. Fixing boats, as far as I understood it. Q. Did it require eight days' delay at Bennett Island?— A. I don't know^ whether it did or not. Q. What is your judgment about that? — A. It did not take eight days to repair boats. Q. Was there any other object that you could legitimately have had in stopping at Bennett Island so long? — A. The only reason probably was to survey the island, or something of that kind. Q. Did not you, and did not Melville, and did not Danenhower and others, or some of those, protest against the delay at Bennett Island ? — A. Not to my knowledge. I did not. I had no business to protest. Q. Did they?— A. That I could not say. Q. But you cannot conceive of any reason for the delay. Was it not ten days? — A. I think it was eight days, if I am not mistaken. Q. Are you not mistaken ; was it not ten days ? — A. No ; I think it was eight days. Q. Can you conceive of or give any reason for the delay of eight days at Bennett Island instead of the one that you have given ? — A. No, sir. The trouble Avas that ice was running some days, and other days it was not. Q. And is it not a matter of fact that you now remember that on that journey repeated complaints were made by some of the officers against the delay ? — A. I heard talk about it, but I could not mention anybody that talked about it. I know for certain that there was some talk about it. Q. But you heard the report and rumor of the complaint? — A. I heard some talk of it. 128 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. Now I will ask you a quest! od, How mauy of these delays did you make on the journey ? There were eight days at Bennett Island! — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many delays did you make at other places, if any ? — A. I don't know whether we made any more delays or not. We got stuck in the ice there for ten days. Q. Now, if you had had that eight days that was spent at Bennett Island would you not probably have arrived in a place of safety before the severe cold and frost set in ? — A. That is a pretty hard question to answer. Q. But I say probably. Would you not have had so many days to have bettered yourselves ? — A. That is a thing I could not have formed any opinion of. Q. I will put it in another way. If you lost eight days by the delay at Bennett Island you certainly lost the benefit of those eight days in aiding your retreat, did you not 1 — A. I suppose so, putting it in that light. Q. Now a good deal has been said about trees and brushwood, and so forth. I wish you to be more careful, if you please, and if I should accidentally use the word axe when I should use the word hatchet re- mind me. — A. I will. Q. Now there was a good deal of what was called drift-wood floating down the Lena, was there not ? — A. Not at that time. Q. There usually is? — A. Yes, sir; drift-wood lands on the edge of the banks. Q. It usually drifts and floats there in the spring time on the break- ing up of the ice, does it not? — A. Yes, and summer time too. Q. Now we will deal first with the timber that comes down. You would not propose to cut with a hatchet one of those timbers or a part of that debris, or one of those trees that confessedly float down, would you! — A. No, not very well. I suppose I could cut it, but it would take me a long time. Q. Exactly. In order to cut those trees, or that timber, or that debris you would have to use an ax would you not! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, in point of fact, did you have an ax with you! — A. That is more than I can say; I don't know. Q. In point of fact were there axes on the ship! — A. Yes, there were. Q. In point of fact were there many axes on the ship!— A. I don't khow; I think probably a half a dozen or so. Q. lupointof fact did you take any with you! — A. Not that I know of. Q. In point of fact, it would be very difficult to kindle a fire with any such debris or timber or trees without an axe to cut it ! — A. You can pick up plenty of small wood there. Q. I know ; I am coming to the small wood. You mean the Arctic willow, do you not ! — A. No, I mean the Arctic drift-wood, twigs, and such things as that. Q. But you can't pick up any parts of trees ! — A. Not very well. Yes, you can pick up some parts. Q. Beyond this delta is the ocean, is it not ! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Where De Long was found is how many miles from the ocean ; I am not speaking of the Lena River, but from the ocean ! — A. Well, that I couldn't say exactly. Q. Exactly ; but between the spot where the body of De Long was found and tbe ocean where the delta ends, is there a large number of the trees known as the Arctic willow ! — A. Yes. Q. And in the immediate vicinity of where De Long's body was found, JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 129 that degenerated into a sort of brushwood, did it not j some little trees as big- as your thumb, perhaps, and some as big as your wrist, but still in the nature of trees *? — A. Well, I suppose you could call them in the nature of trees. Q. Those could be cut with a little hatchet "^ — A. Yes. Q. Or those could in instances be pulled up by the naked hand 1 — A. Yes. Q. Those could, whether cut by axes or little hatchets, be used for fuel, could they not? — A. Yes, if they were dry. Q. Now, you did not have a pick-ax, did you*? — A. ^o ; not at that time. Q. When you were lighting these signal fires that you spoke of, where did you get the fuel ? — A. Picked it up. It was drift-wood that was landed on the banks of the river. Q. Kow, in point of fact, when you were at the place where the body of De Long was found, were there not five sled loads of useless stuff taken — I want to be very accurate to save objection — from about and near and in the presence of those people who had died? — A. Well, the most of the useless stuff was left behind where we landed. Q. Well, what was that stuff that you were carting ? It was not axes, it was not compasses, it was not hatchets, it was not pick-axes, it was not l)ro visions, it was not anything that could aid you in the retreat ; what was it! — A. Well, there was Captain De Long's private journal, the doctor's journal, log-books, and all the ship's papers. Q. Those did not fill five sledges, did they ? — A. I don't know that they did. They didn't have five sledges. Q. Did they have two sledges'? — A. No ; the fact of the matter is we had only one j that is, after we landed on the delta. Q. Well, what did you have besides this literary freight? — A. We had a doctor's box, a box about that size [illustrating], one of these little, four-cornered boxes : we had four rifles, I think, or three. Q. Did you have a single shotgun? — A. No. Q. Now, a moment on that. You spoke yesterday of ptarmigans ? — A. Yes. Q. That is a bird known as the white grouse, is it not? — A. Yes, something like it. Q. You said on Bennett Island you killed them with stones ? — A. No, not on Bennett Island. That was a different kind of bird again on Bennett Island. Q. You did not mention it? What sort of a bird was that? — A. I don't know what they call them exactly, but they were sea birds. Q. I presume that you used stones either in the absence of a rifle or because you thought it was better than a rifle. You could only kill one bird with a rifle?— A. Yes. Q. But with a shotgun you could have killed hundreds? — A. We killed enough the way it was with stones, as far as that is concerned. Q. That is not the question. My question is this : If an intelligent foresight had provided you with shotguns instead of rifles when these hundreds and hundreds of Mr. BoUTELLE (interposing). When do you refer to? Mr. OuKTis. I am referring to the time he shot the ptarmigans, the white grouse. Mr. BouTELLE. But when was the provision to be made? You ask if intelligent foresight had provided shotguns. When? Mr. Curtis. At any time. In the first place it should have been 9 J Q* 130 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. made at the fitting out of the ship. I will find out afterwards whether it was or not. Mr. BouTELLE. I would like to understand the drift of the investi- gation myself. Mr. Curtis. I will go back and put it in another shape. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Now, in point of fact, were any shotguns i)ut on board that ves- sel at San Francisco"? — A. Yes; there were. Q. In point of fact, were any shotguns on board that vessel during the voyage? — A. Yes. Q. In point of fact, were any shotguns on that vessel before she was sunk in the ice and while she was still afloat? — A. While she was afloat there were shotguns aboard, and when she was sinking shotguns were taken out. Q. When you left the ship did you take any shotguns with you? — A. When we left the ship we took the shotguns out of the ship. Q. Now, when you threw stones at the birds did you have any shot- guns ? — A. No, sir. Q. Why ? — A. Because we thought it was not necessary ; we could kill them with stones. Q. Did you have any shotguns in your i^ossession ? — A. No, sir. Q. Where were they 1 — A. They were left behind on the ice. Q. Why ? — A. They made too much weight to carry, probably. Q. Did you not know that the shotgun was far superior to the rifle as an aid to you to get food ? — A. That I could not say. Q. These ptarmigans you spoke of yesterday are a species of white grouse! — A. Yes. Q. If you had had one of those shotguns, and these hundreds of ptarmigans or white grouse — I use the term ''white grouse" because the word "ptarmigan" seems to excite the risibility of the other side — were flying over you, you could have killed them, could you not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And if you could have killed them, they are fair, palatable food, are they not ? — A. Oh, yes ; they are v^ery good eating. Q. In fact there are very few birds in any climate, under certain cir- cuQistances, that are better? — A. I don't think there are any better. Mr. Curtis. So that the rifle will only kill one and sometimes won't kill even that. The rifle sometimes misses. A shotgun will kill hun- dreds of birds. Mr. Arnoux. I move that the record of the Court of Inquiry be ad- mitted in evidence. The Chairman. My opinion is that this record is admissible, and then any party who desires to take it has a right to do so. Any party who desires to extend it by additional evidence has the right to do so, and any party who seeks to modify the evidence therein by additional evidence has the right to do so. I am clearly of the opinion that the evidence is admissible, and then any change that may be made by alteration or addition is admissible. Mr. McAdoo. It is understood, however, that the findings of the court have no binding influence on this committee. Mr. Curtis. AVith that understanding, I have no objection whatever. Mr. McAdoo. Let it be received as an exhibit in the case. That will include the maps. (The book was then received in evidence by the committee and marked by the stenographer Exhibit No. 2.) I JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 131 Mr. Curtis. Then I will offer this map. (The map offered in evidence by Mr. Curtis was admitted by the com- mittee and marked by the stenographer Exhibit No. 3.) By Mr. Curtis : Q. Was not the only shotgun you possessed one belonging to Mr. Kewcomb ; and was it not his own private property ? — A. As far as I know, it was. Q. You were speaking of the doctor's box 5 was not that carried nearly empty? — A. Well, the contents of it didn't amount to much j there were some compound cathartic pills in it. Q. If you had not delayed at Bennett Island during the period that you have spoken of, would you not have reached the land before the gale came on in which the ship was lost? — A. Probably we would, probably not ; it is hard to tell. Q. Did not De Long refuse a shotgun from a Eussian trader before going in the Arctic? — A. That is a thing I don't know. Q. Now, in reference to the compasses that you had ; you left some compasses on board, did you not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was the character of the compass that you took ? — A. It was one of these surveying compasses ; no good aboard a boat. Q. What you call a prismatic compass? — A. Yes. Q. Is it not impossible in a rough sea to indicate by a compass of that description and character your course ? — A. You couldn't use it at all in sea way. Q. Is it not a matter of fact that the prismatic compass is entirely worthless in a journey upon the sea?— A. As far as I know it is. Q. And are you not clearly of the opinion that if Captain De Long had possessed a proper compass he could have indicated with a degree of precision where he was ? Mr. BouTELLE (interposing). How could the compass tell him where he was? A. The compass would not tell him the exact place where he was. Q. I say to a degree ? — A. It would only tell him what course to steer. Of course if we had no compass we would have to steer by the sun, moon, or stars. Q. Then, if he knew the direction to steer he would have some knowl- edge of his destination? — A. The only knowledge he would have is the course he steered and where he was steering for, as far as I know. Q. It would not give him any knowledge on that subject ? — A. Not of his whereabouts. Q. Not in that part of the country where he was familiar? — A. The compass would not. A compass is only to find your course from one l)lace to another. Q. If you, or any of Melville's party, had been in Bulun the 15th day of October, and started a party north at that date, what would have been the chance of saving De Long? — A. Well, if I had been in Bulun on the 15th and knew that the people lived as long as they did, the result would have been that they would have been saved probably. Q. Your only means of ascertaining the date when you left De Long and his party and when you were in Bulun were the means that you stated yesterday ? — A. The same means. Q. Outside of that you have no knowledge ? — A. I have no knowl- edge. The only way I can tell my time is by the time I left Captain De Long. I knew it was the 9th of October, and I kept on following the time up afterwards. I had no papers to keep the record, but I 132 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. counted up the nights that we had been sleeping to find the proper date again as near as I could tell. Q. Were you put under arrest by De Long in relation to crossing the river on a raft *? — A. I was. Q. Please give the details of that matter. — A. We came to a river running eastward, and we could wade through, and Captain De Long told me to take a man and go and make a raft. The only thing I had to fasten a raft together was four pieces of rope and another longer piece. In the first place I went to work and took four long pieces of wood and put them together the same as a picture frame; then I helped the men to get cross-pieces and put them on this frame. After we had cross-pieces enough to cover the frame I got another thin piece of rope; that was fastened on one end of the frame and hauled across all these logs and fastened to the other end of the frame and hauled as tight as I could bind them together. That was the only lashing attached to all these logs — a piece of rope about an inch thick to keep down probably twenty-five logs. After the raft was finished Captain De Long gave me orders to take as many men as I could and take them across. I took five men across, paddling the river with pieces of board. I left three over there and two had to paddle the raft back. When I came back Captain De Long asked me if the raft would not carry another man. I told him she might, or she might not. ^'Well," says he, "I am going to send down another man," and he did send another man. But instead of sending five he sent down seven, when he was only going to send six. He told us to shove off. As soon as we shoved off the raft sank and everybody got wet. We managed to get back to shore again. After we got back on the beach Captain De Long told the sick peoi)le to go up to the tent. We had three sick people who had to go up to the hut again and dry their clothing. Then he asked me, "Nindemann, what are you going to do now?" Says I, "The only thing to do is to put the pieces all together and haul the rope tight." Says he, '^1 told you a hundred times to haul the rope as tight as you could." I said, "I did haul it as tight as 1 could." He told me to take the men and get more cross pieces and fix the raft again. As I left him, and got probably 25 paces away, I showed signs of anger. I had my back turned to him. He did not see my face. I only shut my fist and swung my arm, like that [illustratingj. He calleid me back. Says he, " What's the matter^' Says I, "Nothing at all." Says he, "At the first word that comes from you I will have you court- martialed." Says 1, "Very well, I am satisfied." Says he, "Go up to the hut and consider yourself under arrest." Says I, "Very good, sir." That is all I said to Captain De Long at that time. Q. Did he make any charge against you at that time ? — A. I don't know whether he did or not. He said he made a charge against me — that he would court-martial me. Q. Did he say what he thought you were guilty of? — A. No: Q. Had you spoken a disrespectful word to him ? — A. Not at all. Q. Had you refused to comply with any order that he had given ? — A Not that I know of. The words were just what I told you between us; nothing more and nothing less. By Mr. Arnoux: Q. How long did that arrest continue? — A. Probably an hour and a half or two hours. But whether 1 was released from that arrest or not I couldn't say. Q. You went back to duty. — A. I don't know whether I did. Q. After an hour and a half you went back to work again. — A. es. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 133 By Mr. Boutelle : Q. Did the captain give you any order to goto work again"? — A. Yes. Q. What did he say? — A. All he said was, " Take your traps and go to work again." But he didn't say, "I relieve you from arrest." Mr. McAdoo. It is merely a technical matter. " You are under ar- rest," and "you are not." By Mr. Curtis : Q. Mr. Collins was in good physical condition, was he not? — A. Alter the suspension; yes, sir. Q. He was able and anxious and willing to assist the rest of the party, was he not? — A. Yes. Q. Did you not advise De Long not to overload the men with useless loads that were breaking down their strengtah? — A. I didn't use those words, but I asked the captain if he wouldn't leave the journals be- hind, telling him that I would be willing, if he would leave them in the hut, to go back again and get them. Q. Did he do so? — A. No, sir; he made me the reply, "Nindemann, as long as I can get along on my feet these records will have to go with me; as long as I have men with me they will have to go." Q. Did you not throw away some of the stuff and tell him you were overloaded? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you overloaded? — A. I was at that time. Q. When was that ? — A. That was at the time of the first start we made from the camp where we landed. Q. In what way were you overloaded ? — A. I was overloaded in pTo- visions. I was carrying some pemmican then and rifles and ammunition. Q. Anything else ? — A. No, not on my i3art. Q. You carried a number of rifles, did you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many ? — A. I think there were four at the first going off. Q. What was the comparative weight, if you know, of the rifle and the shotgun ? — A. That I don't know. Q. Was the rifle heavier? — A. A rifle is heavier than a shotgun, some of them. Q. And there was one shotgun ? — A. We didn't have any shotgun. Q. There was one shotgun in the party, that of Professor iSTewcomb? — A. Professor Newcomb was not along with us. Q. But originally, I mean ? — A. Yes, there was one shotgun in the party then. Q. Do you not know the relative weight of the rifle and the shot- gun? — A. There is a difference between the two but I couldn't state the weight. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. What did you have the rifles for? — A. For shooting seals, wal- ruses, bears, anything we could come across. I even shot ptarmigans with them. By Mr. CURTlS : Q. Was there a seaman in the party named Star? — A. Not in our party. Q. During the retreat on the ice? — A. Yes, sir. Q. He belonged to the expedition? — A. Yes. Q. Do you know of his being arrested? — A. I think he was. Q. Do you know what for? — A. I don't know that I remember ex- actly what it was for. 134 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. Did lie tell you"? — A. We had a .talk about it. We were going to band in a petition to the captain to release him from arrest. Q. In your petition did you state the cause of his arrest! — A. We did not baud it in. We were advised not to. Q. What did Star tell you as to the cause of bis arrest Mr. Arnoux (interposing). He is alive. Q. He is dead, is be not? — A. He was lost along with Chipp. Q. What did he tell you about the cause of his arrest? — A. As far as I know, it was on account of a little difficulty between Melville and Star about some boot-soles that Mr. Melville bad thrown on bis sleep- ing bag. Star came along (be didn't know, probably, that Mr. Melville put it there) and threw it off on the ice, and Mr. Melville wanted him to pick it ui) again, and Star made some remarks and the captain beard him and he walked up to them and wanted to know what the matter was. Mr. Melville made his complaint and Star made his complaint, as far as I could make out, and I believe the captain told Star to shut up, and Star kept on talking, trying to defend himself, something like that, and the captain told him he was under arrest. Q. How long did be continue under arrest? — A. Well, I don't know whether he was released from arrest or not, but be was put to work after we took to the boats. I think Mr. Chipp asked that he go to work again. Q. Star was one of the strongest and ablest among the men? — A. I think be was the strongest. Q. And it was very essential at that time to have all the strong and able men on duty, was it not ? — A. I should think so. Q. Was Mr. Newcomb put under arrest also ? — A. I think he was. Q. When was be i>ut under arrest? — A. That I couldn't say exactly. I think there was a little difficulty. I don't know anything about it, only tbat T beard other people say that there was a little difficulty be- tween him and Mr. Danenhower. Q. How long did be continue under arrest? — A. That I don't know; very probably be never was released for all I know. Q. Did be continue to do work after his arrest, or do you know any- thing about that? — A. I couldn't state that exactly. I know nothing about what be was arrested for and whether he went to work or not. Q. Do you know from any statement made to you by anybody wbat bis arrest was caused by? — A. No, sir; the only thing I beard was, the captain told Mr. Chipp Mr. Arnoux (interposing). I object to his stating, when both the parties are alive. Danenhower is alive and Newcomb is alive. Mr. Curtis. I withdraw the question. Q. (Resuming.) Who took care of tbe supplies and effects of Lieu- tenant De Long's party and looked after tbem ? — A. I was in charge of that as far as I know. When Captain De Long wanted anything done he told me to do it or to have it done. Q. How did you care for Lieutenant De Long as far as his personal case is concerned ? — A. I think I cared as much for him as I could have done for my own father, probably more. Q. What did you do for him ? — A. I used to put him in bis sleeping- bag and take him out of it; dress him and undress him most. Q. How did be treat you alter all that kindness and attention? — A. Well, 1 can't complain that he treated me in anyways badly, but some- times I didn't think be treated me right. He kind of lowered me some- Uraes when 1 didn't think be bad reason to. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 135 Q. Without any cause? — A. I never gave him any cause that I know of. Q. Did it strike you that he was a man of hasty and impulsive tem- per? — A. It appeared to me like that sometimes. Q. You did not consider that you had done anything worthy of pun- ishment, did you"? — A. I^o, sir; I did not, as far as my knowledge goes. In fact I did everything I possibly could do. Q. As far as your recollection goes, you did everything in your power to serve the expedition"? — A. I could not have done any more. Q. What were the tools you had with which to make Erichsen's sled? — A. I had a bone-saw and a sheath-knife. Q. A bone-saw? — A. Yes. Q. Explain to us what that was made of? — A. It was one of these doctor's saws. Q. A surgical saw? — A. Yes. Q. Originally on the ship? — A. Yes, it had been on the ship; it was a doctor's instrument, one of these little saws with a back to it. Q. Originally on the ship was there not a full supply of carpenter's tools? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were any of those taken with you? — A. Some. Q. What? — A. A hammer, plane, nails, a couple of chisels, and an augur. Q. You had an ample supply of all carpenter's tools, did you not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did any of the deck officers stand watch on the deck to your knowledge? — A. Not that I know of. Q. You shipiDcd as a seaman? — A. I shipped as a seaman. Q. Who stood the deck watches, what time, and for how long? — A. There was Mr. Cole, a gentleman who is crazy now, who is here in Wash- ington now, and Mr. Dunbar, the ice pilot, and myself; from the time we left San Francisco until the time the ship was frozen in the ice. Q. If any of the commissioned officers had stood deck watch would you probably have known it ? — A. Yes, sir ; my log will show who stood the watches. Q. As stated yesterday, you are a seaman of very great experience; this was your third polar voyage, was it not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. JSTow let me ask you, is it customary in the Navy to stand deck watches, in charge of the deck, when the ship is under way ? — A. I don't think it is, as far as my knowledge goes. Mr. Arnoux. I inquired of Mr. Bartlett about some of the customs of the Navy, and I think counsel objected and said Bartlett was a com- mon seaman and was not prepared to tell the customs of the Navy. Mr. OuE-Tis. On the contrary, the ruling of the committee was that he should give his testimony, and that it should go in for what it was worth. The Chairman. I think he did give his testimony on this very subject. Mr. Arnoux. I do not object to that, but to the question is it custom- ary on naval vessels at sea. The Chairman. Well, if this witness has knowledge of the fact he can testify to it. The Witness. I don't know whether it is a fact or not. By Mr. Curtis : Q. You say that you did not see them stand the deck watches ? — A. I did not see what they call officers who stood regular deck watches. Q. Now I am asking you as an experienced seaman, is it customary 136 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. for seamen in the Navy to stand deck watches when the ship is under way*? — A. Not as far as my knowledge goes, when the ship is under way. Q. What were your duties after the ship got locked in the ice? — A. I was taken off watch and put to work as carpenter. I had to do car- penter's work. By Mr. BouTELLE : Q. You were taken off the watch, then ? — A. Yes; somebody else was put in my place, and I had to go and do carpenter's work. By Mr. McAdoo : Q. Had you any training as a carpenter ?— A. No, sir ; I learned by myself. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Who was the man who put the washboard around the first cutter, and by whose orders ■? — A. I don't think anybody gave me any orders, but I am the man who put it around. Q. Could you have lived through the gale without that washboard ? — A. No, sir. Q. That was the means of your salvation at that time ? — A. As far as I can see. Q. How long did De Long travel after you left him, judging from the point where you left him and the point where you found him? — A. He had not traveled as far from the time I left him until the 3()th of Octo- ber, as me and Noros did the first day by about 2J miles. Q. Then you should judge the distance De Long traveled between the time you left him and the time you found his remains, as about 2J miles? — A. No, about 8 or 10 miles; that they traveled about 8 or 10 or 12 miles from the time I left him. That was the distance they trav- eled to the time they died. Q. Was that as great a distance as you and Noros traveled the first day after leaving He Long 1 — A. No, sir ; we traveled farther to the southward by about 2 miles. Q. What was the condition of each one of the party as compared with yourself? — A. Captain De Long had given out the day belbre I left him, as I could see. He was hanging back. Although he did not tell me so, as far as I could see I thought he was pretty well played out. The rest kept on well enough. I went back three or four times and asked Captain De Long if I could assist him, and he said no, he was all right, for me to go ahead and try to light a fire as quick as I could when we came to the river bank. Q. In what condition was Collins at that time? — A. I think Collins was in as good condition as any of us. Q. And was that true of the other men except De Long? — A. As far as I know the rest of the men kept on following right straight along. Q. Where did De Long think he was when you left him? — A. When I left him he thouglit he was south of an island called Tit Arrii. Q. If they were in as good i)hysical condition as you, they could have traveled along with you, they could have traveled as far as you. — A. I should think so. Q, Then, as a matter of fact, if all the party had gone with you they would have reached the same destination and been saved? — A. Proba- bly they would if they had gone through what we did, wading up to our waists in water for three days, with no shelter and no fire of any kind. JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 137 By Mr. Boutelle : Q. Wliy were you and Noros selected to go ahead *? — A. That I could not say. Q. Did you volunteer'? — A. I did not volunteer; no, sir; Captain De Long asked me — well, in one way I did volunteer, because Captain De Long asked me before Erichsen died whether I was strong enough to go to Ku Mark Surk, as he thought we were 25 miles distant from there ; Ku Mark Surk was 25 miles south of us. He asked me who I was going to take along. He wanted me to take Iverson. Iverson had been com- plaining of his feet two or three days before that, and I tokl him of it. Captain He Long says, ''You can take anybody except Alexy." He wanted him to stay with the party and hunt for them. Then the doctor said, "You had better take Noros," and the captain spoke up and said, "Noros is a better man than Alexy, and can sustain the journey." Q. Were you taken because you could stand if? — A. I had been with Captain He Long for seven years ; I was four years with him in the ship St. Mary's, before the expedition. Q. As a matter of fact, were you in a better condition than some of the others? — A. I could not say I was in a better condition. Of course I had the same food, but I was more exposed than any of theui. I used to go ahead and get wet when the rest were dry. Q. You said one of the men had sore feet? — A. Yes, sir. Q. He would not have been in as good condition as Noros was? — A. No, sir ; he was complaining about his feet, still he kept up. Every- body was complaining, still they kept up. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Hid Hr. Ambler ask to go ? — A. Not that I know of, only from what I heard in the testimony. I didn't know who Captain He Long was going to send the first time he spoke of it. Q. Ho yoti know whether Collins asked to go ?— A. I couldn't say for certain. Q. What do yoti mean by " for certain"? — A. I couldn't say by my memory. Q. Ho you know that Hr. Ambler and Collins requested to go and were refused permission ? — A. That I couldn't say, either. They might have asked. I can't remember everything, the time is too long past. Q. Hid He Long have any nautical instruments with him when he landed?— A. He had. Q. Hid he take them along in order to keep track of his location ? — A. The only thing he took along was a compass and a barometer — one of these pocket barometers. Q. For the purpose, as you thought, of indicating or keeping track of his location ? — -A. I suppose so. Q. Would it not have been of more benefit to the party to have car- ried the nautical instruments than the books and papers that were carried ? — A. I don't know, exactly. He could probably have told his latitude better if he had taken his sextant and his nautical almanac. Q. The sextant was left behind, was it not ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. And that would have given very important information as to what ? — A. As to the south. Q. You were trying to make for the south ? — A. Yes ; that was the only thing we could do. Q. Without the aid of the sextant it was impossible to proceed in that direction, was it not? — A. As far as that was concerned, we could pro- ceed south with the compass^ because the compass would have told us 138 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. the same thing. But the thing is he could have told somewhere near the latitude he was in. Q. What reason can you assign for leaving the sextant behind ? — A. Not any that I know of, except we had too much weight to carry. Q. Did you not and do you not consider that it was a most imi)ortaut instrument ? — A. I could not say exactly whether it was or not. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. Where did they leave the sextant ? — A. On the beach, when we landed. Q. When you left the boat ? — A. Yes, sir. By Mr. McAdoo : Q. Is it a heavy instrument ? — A. No, sir. Q. About how many pounds would it weigh ? — A. Probably as much as four pounds. By Mr. Curtis : Q. If it had been a matter resting with your judgment would you have left the sextant ? — A. Well, that is a thing that I could not say very well. By Mr. Boutelle: Q. How is a sextant put up 5 how is it carried 1 — A. Put up in a little box about as high as the sextant, with no spare room in it at all. Q. A wooden box! — A. A wooden box. By Mr. McAdoo : Q. Is there any handle to the box? — A. No, sir ; it was a little wooden box about that long and that wide [illustrating]. Q. A narrow box? — A. Yes; it is'in a three-cornered shape. By Mr. Curtis : Q. How was the ice in the river when you left De Long, and how was it after you had left him? — A. The river that I left Captain De Long and his x)arty on, the ice was running in at that time. Then, after we left Captain De Long the first day we traveled along this river until we came to a point that turned away in to the westward, and as it was getting late we just camped down on that point and started a big fire and laid down alongside of it for the night. The next morning we started to the westward, trying to follow this river, as we thought it was, and about ten o'clock a gale set in — this was on the 10th of Octo- ber — so that we could not see anything at all. The gale, I think, was from the northwest. Along this river we came to places where we had to wade; little places where tlie ice was not strong enough on the edge to carry us; after we got on to it it was heavy enough to bear us. There were little water holes in it. On getting off that ice we had to wade again. Until 12 o'clock that night, comparatively, we could not see where we were going. The snow blinded us. We tried to start a fire, but we couldn't start any fire, so we dug a hole and crawled into that. The next morning we started off again, and we had to wade again all that day until we got to a hut, and we had to stay there on account of the gale of wind. We started oft' again the next day and had to wade until we got down to the thick ice in the river, and alter that we didn't have any more wading to do. I believe we did our last wad- ing on the 13th of October. Q. Did you not cross the main river Lena on October 15th, 1881 ? — JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 139 A. I think it was the main river. I am almost sure of it, on account of it being the biggest river there was. Q. And where you crossed was not the current very rapid? — A. At that time I could not say how swift it was 5 but in the water holes, where we could see the water, the current ran very swiftly. Q. How did you cross at that time — on the ice? — A. On the ice, avoiding these big water holes; we felt our way across with a stick. Q. Did Captain De Long ever forbid you to wade! — A. He did; he gave me strict orders not to wade nor to let Noros wade. Q. Could you have made any progress without wading? — A. I could not have made any progress, as far as I can see now. I had to go away into the west. Q, If any of Melville's party had started north along the river from Bulun on October 15th, would not the chance of saving l)e Long's party have been good ? — A. Well, if they had started. Q. I say if they had started. — A. I should think it would. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. Why did Captain De Long tell you not to wade? — A. I don't know his reason exactly ; probably he did not want me to freeze or anything of that kind. He knew I never cared; I used to go right in if I wanted to find the road. Q. It was out of consideration for your health ? — A. I don't know. Q. Is not that your opinion? — A. Probably it was. Q. When you got on shore with the sextant, did Captain De Long use it and take his bearings ? — A. No, you can't get any bearings with a sextant. Q. I mean take his latitude. A. No, sir. Q. Did they not have any sun so that they could do it? — A. Th< y didn't have any sun. The first night or second night when we landed we had a snow storm. The next day the weather was not very clear. The weather was clear enough at one time, but he didn't take an^^ ob- servation then. Q. When Captain DeLong started in the boats did he not start for the- delta of the Lena ?— A. His intention was, as far as I know, to start for a place called Barkin at the northeast corner of the delta. Q. That was a part of the delta ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And you did arrive on the delta?— A. Yes, sir; we arrived on the delta. Q. Was not one of the officers on deck all the time from the time you left San Francisco until you went into the ice ? — A. No, sir. Q. Was there any officer on deck at any time ? — A. On deck, but not all the time. Q. Where they on deck most of the time ? — A. No, sir. Q. From the time you left San Francisco until you got to the ice ? — A. No, sir; even at night they were not on deck; only when they were called for or when they came out to make an observation, did they come on deck. Q. When you got into the ice were they not on deck ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did not Mr. Chipp and Captain DeLong divide the day into two watches of twelve hours each, when they were on the ice? — Yes, that is all right. Certainly they did, as far as I know. Q. Talking about the surveying compass, did he use that when he surveyed Bennett Island ?-^A. He took his bearings with it on the ice. Q. Was it not a part of the duty of the expedition to survey any 140 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. country or land that you found? — A. That was a part of the duty; yes, sir. Q. Now, you say that you staid there eight days. A part of the time were you detained by storms or fogs? — A. I don't think we were de- layed by any storms or fogs, as far as that is concerned. Q. Did you not have to wait some time for the captain to be able to get his longitude there on account of the fog? — A. Yes, but that was to place the island in a proper position. Q. But I say, no matter what it was, the fact was that he had de- layed to get that? — A. To get that. Q. How long a time did that delay him? — A. Eight days. Q. The whole eight days were used? — A. (Interrupting.) There were two expeditions sent out along the coast while we were lying on that island, one in charge of Mr. Ohipp, and the other in charge of Ice-Pilot Dunbar. Q. In regard to those shotguns. Were there any shotguns on board the vessel besides that one that belonged to Mr. Newcomb? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many? — A. About six, I should think. Q. How many of those were taken ashore when the things were put on the ice ? — A. I don't know ; probably there were three or four. Q. Were the shotguns suitable to hunt bears, seals, and walrus with? — A. If you are close enough you can kill a bear with one. Q. I say, are they good for such hunting? — A. I, for my part, would not haA^e them for hunting seals, walrus, or bears. Q. The rifles were good for that purpose, were they not ? — A. Yes, if you are smart enough to hit them. Q. When you got on the delta how many flocks of ptarmigans did you see while the i^arty were together? — A. We saw quite a good many. I don't mean to say that we saw enough to support the party. Q. Were not the principal flocks of ptarmigans that you saw on the opposite side of the river, too far ofl'to shoot them ? — A. I know nothing about that. I did not take mj^ observation in that line at all, watching every bird flying by. I say I saw a good many of them, but I did not watch every flock we saw. Q. Do you suppose you saw altogether fifty while the party were together ? — A. Yes, I saw probably four hundred ; probably more. Q. Do those birds fly high or low ? — A. Low. Q. So that you could have killed the whole four hundred if you had had shotguns? — A. No, I don't say I could have killed every one, or anybody else. Q. They were not within range? — A. Sometimes they were and some- times they were not. You have to go after them the same as you do after other game. Q. But I say when they were flying over your heads? — A. Certainly, if we wanted to shoot. Q. Were there many such flecks flying over your lieads near enough to shoot them, or were they at a distance ? — A. Most of the time we saw them sitting down until we got near enough so that they would fly up. Q. How long would you have been able to sustain the party on those birds if you had had tiie means of shooting them ? — A. If we had had the means of shooting them, and there had been enough of them, we could have sustained ourselves all the time. Q. I say how long could you have sustained the party on those birds as you saw them! — A. Quite a long time if we had killed them all. Q. You think you would have saved the party if you had killed the JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 141 birds as you saw them ? — A. We could have sustained ourselves for some time. Q. I say would they have saved the party 1 — A. I don't know whether they would or not. Q. Could the party, in your judgment, if they had had shotguns with them, have killed enough birds to sustain life until relief came to them ? — A. No ; I don't think we could, because we staid all winter. By Mr. MoAdoo: Q. Do you think, if the party had been provided with proi)er shot- guns, and had made a special effort to kill these birds, from their being as abundant as you state, that it would have relieved the party con- siderably and given you more provisions than you had ■? — A. I could not say that for a certainty, because we shot a couple of deer, and prob- ably that was as much as all the birds we could have shot. By Mr. BouTELLE : Q. You shot the deer with rifles ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What were those — reindeer ? — A. Eeindeer. ^ By Mr. MoAdoo; Q. Birds were more plentiful than deer"? — A. There were very few birds at that time, only these ptarmigans on the delta. The deer all leave the delta in the winter. There were very few of them. They all go into the mountains in the winter. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. At the time the deer were shot could they have been shot with shotguns'?— A. Yes, just as well as with rifles. They came right up to us. VVe were lying down watching for them to come up. Q. iNow you were speaking about traveling over the ice. Is it not a fact that on some days the drift of the ice to the northwest was greater than your progress south ? — A. That I could not say, only from what I heard. Q. Did you not hear in the party, by the observations that were taken, that notwithstanding all your efforts to go south, at the end of the day you were farther north than when you commenced ? — A. That is what I heard. Q. In your judgment, then, would it have been possible to have taken a straight line south and got out of the ice"? — A. Yes, sir ; because the current was setting to the northwestward, or to the southwest, north or northwest. It all depends upon how the ice is. We could have drifted to the southwestward ; I don't mean to say a straight southern course. Q. Was it not in your judgment a wiser judgment to go to the land and take these islands in and not be drifted by the ice constantly to the northwest ? — A. I should not say so ; no. Q. What settlement was there in Siberia opposite you in a southerly course ^^A. Southwesterly course. As far as I know there is a river called Yana, on which there is a settlement called Werchojansk, I think it is. Q. Was it in your judgment more advisable to have gone to that set- tlement than to have gone to the Lena? — A. As far as I thought at that time it would have been better if we had steered to the south, because there was nothing to hinder us. There was just as much chance of safety to the south as there was to the southwestward. Q. Did you suggest that to Captain De Long? — A. No, sir; simply because it was not my place to do so. 142 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. You were asked about the Arctic willow. Did you, as matter of fact, ever have any occasion to use the Arctic willow as fuel ! — A. As small shoots, probably we did. You couldn't tell the difference between that and other brush-wood, because there is a good deal of small brusli and shoot- wood that comes down in the Lena. You couldn't tell what it was. Q. I mean that that was growing around you ? — A. We didn't use that except to make tea out of. Q. But I say for fuel '? — A. I couldn't say exactly. Probably we would pick up some of it while picking up wood. Q. But the fire thatyou madeyou made of the drift-wood ? — A. When we first kindled it we had to find small wood. Then we had to get logs, and it took three or four men to carry them. We had to keep one man on watch at the fire all night while the rest were sleeping. Q. Did you find any difficulty in getting fuel of that kind 1 — A. Yes, sometimes, because this stuff" is all frozen into the ground and you have got to break it out, and if you don't want to do that you have to go away a half a mile, or a mile, and carry it. I found it very difficult to get wood enough. Sometimes we didn't have fire enough probably. By Mr. BouTELLE : Q. How deep is the snow there? — A. Not very deep. But on the delta there is all this swamp ground, and you will go up to your knees in it. The snow lays on top of it, and when you break through it makes it very hard walking. Q. The snow makes a sort of crust over it? — A. Yes, sir; in some places. There is where the wood would be heaped up G feet high ; tim- bers witli roofs and everything on them. You will find a regular line along the delta, what is called the wood line, and in some places you will see this drift-wood heaped up as high as this room, where the current •sweeping by has deposited trees as they came down. By Mr. Arnoux: Q. As they came down the main Lena River? — A. Yes, sir. Q. About how long is the Lena River? — A. l^robably a couple of thousand versts. Q. And it is pretty nearly as large as the Mississippi ? — A. I have seen the Mississippi, but I don't remember it. Q. The Lena is a very large river? — A. Y"es, sir. Q. After you reached the delta did you have any work of any kind that would make pick-axes desirable? — A. No. Q. How deep down can you go in the delta before you reach the line of frost? — A. That is a thing I never tried. Q. Do you know anything about how deep down the soil was to the frost ? — A. No. And the simple reason is, I didn't try. We didn't have any tools. When Erichsen died Captain De Long gave orders to dig a grave, and I told him we didn't liave any tools. I wanted him to leave liim in the hut. He said no; a seaman's grave was in the water, aiul we buried liim in the river. Q. You spoke about leaving behind the nautical instruments. Did you not reduce your loads to the smallest amount possible, retaining; the things that Captain De Long considered the most necessary? — A. Yes, sir J I suppose so. Of course we had nothing to take but the boat's •ecords, rities, and ammunition. Q. Did you not even leave your sleeping-bags behind you because ''hey were too heavy to carry? — A. Because they were not fit to carry, f hey got water-soaked, and the hair all fell off of them. JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 143 Q. Did not Mr. Newcomb carry liis sliotguu with him all through the retreat until you got to the boats ? — A. That I could not say for certain. I did not pay attention enough to that. Q. What is your best impression 1 — A. I think he did until we got to the boats. Q. During the retreat did you kill any bears or seals? — A. During the retreat there was one bear killed and some seals and walrus and birds. Q. And those were killed with a ri|le'? — A. Yes, sir. By Mr. Curtis : Q. You killed the bears with the rifles, ^ow, if you had had the shot- guns to have killed the birds you would have had just so much more food, would you not 1 — A. Yes, but would we have been able to carry all this? By Mr. Boutelle : Q. Were you short of food at the time when you could have shot the birds? — A. No, sir; not on Bennett Island. Q. You said a while ago that you shot some deer, and that the deer furnished as much food as the birds you probably would have shot. When you had the deer did they supply as much food as you needed ? — A. At that time; yes, sir. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Of course, if you had shot the birds you would have had more food, would you not? — A. Certainly. By Mr. McAdoo : Q. During the entire winter were the birds more or less plentiful ; would you see them eveiy other day or so? — A. As I say, in the winter time there is nothing on the Lena delta except i)tarmigans. The geese and ducks all leave for the south. Q. And deer are not present in the winter at all? — A. I think a few are present on the Lena delta, but a very few. Q. Your party came in contact with no deer, did they? — A. We came in contact in March with some of them. But during the period of dark- ness I don't think there are any of them on the delta. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. How long was it from the time you left De Long until you reached other people?— A. We were found by people on the 22d. Q. And you left on what date? — A. On the Dth. Q. Thirteen days? — A. Yes. Then we had had nothing to eat for two days before that. Q. How did you know where to go? — A. The only thing I had to go by was the sun when I did see it, and we saw that very seldom. Q. You went in a general direction, as near as you could judge? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were there any tracks there? — A. No, sir. It is a wild country all through there. By Mr. Arnoux: Q. What was this party that you first met after you left De Long? — A. These Tongoose natives that live up there, that came from the north at the same time, only they traveled to the westward, while we were to the eastward. Q. How did the natives find you? — A. In a starving condition. 144 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. By Mr. McAdoo: Q. How many days had you been without food*? — A. From the 6th to the 19th. We found an old rotten fish during that time that was not fit for anybody to eat. Then we lived on boot-soles and an old pair of seal skin pants that I had. Q. Did you have any guns *? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You had one of the rifles 1 — A. Yes. By Mr. BouTELLE : Q. Did you have any means of making a fire*? — A. The only means were matches and a sheath-knife. Q. Were you moving when you met these people '? — A. No, sir ; we were in the hut. Q. Had you given up then 1 — A. I was going to give up the day be- fore, a couple of hours before we came to this hut. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. How did the natives come to find you in that place? — A. It was an accident. Q. I wish you would give the co mmittee an account of that accident. — A. As far as I know these people came from the Lena delta from a set- tlement to the west of us on the line that we took, and this man who owned the hut we were in had some fish-nets there and he was coming to look after these fish-nets. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. Did you find the hut there ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. It was a fisherman's hut ? — A. Yes, sir ; we found some mildewed fish, that is, fish that the natives had pressed the oil out of. You could compare it with sawdust. We were living on that when the natives found us. By Mr. McAdoo : Q. What kind of fish are they ; what species are they ? — A. I couldn't tell you ; they are very large fish. By Mr. Boutelle: Q. How long could you have kept alive, do you think ! — A. We calcu- lated to have provisions for ten days with this fish that we found. Our calculation was to start again after we rested for two days ; we were going to start the same day the natives came and found us if it hadn't been for my boots giving out ; but I don't think if we had started that we ever would have reached anywhere ; we were not in condition to go much farther. By Mr. Arnoux: Q. This hut had been deserted not to be occupied again for the win- ter f — A. It was on the road to Bulun; when the natives come along there and they want shelter they come right in these huts along the road. Q. And at that time most of the natives had gone south to Bulun ? — A. I learned afterwards that there were plenty of people within twenty- five miles of where we landed. Q. When you got farther down did you meet any natives with rein- deer? — A. We met these natives that found us Avith reindeer j they had twenty seven sleighs loaded with fish and reindeer meat and skins, and they had about a hundred head of reindeer. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 145 Q. How maDy meu were there ? — A. There were five or six men and two or three women. By Mr. Arnoux: Q. I am speaking of the native that found you *? — A. He found us and went back again to get assistance. Q. How long was he gone until he came back again'? — A. He was gone from dinner time until about G o'clock m the evening, probably. Q. When he came back what did he bring with him?— A. A couple of sleighs and a couple more men. Q. Then they took you with them "? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How far did they take you ? — A. Down to Ku Mark Surk. Q. How many miles is that ! — A. As far as I know, I think from Bul- cour to Ku Mark Surk is 50 versts. But it took us two days from where they took me that night to make Ku Mark Surk ; that is, going through the mountains. ^ Q. J^ow, how many men were there, and how many reindeer and sleighs at the time you started out from that hut where you were found by those men? — A. There were three sleighs and six men. Q. And how many miles, at that time, were you probably distant from Captain De Long !— A. I could not say the distance at that time. When I went over that road, I thought from the course I took I had traveled about 130 miles. Q. As a matter of fact 1 The Witness. From Barkin ? Mr. Arnoux. Yes. A. From Barkin to that place, when the river is frozen over, you could make it in one day. Q. Did you get those men to go back and relieve Captain De Long "? —A. I did. I did everything in my power. Q. And you could not succeed ? — A. I could not succeed, and when I found that I could not succeed I went south. Q. Then when you went south and met the rest of the party with their hundred reindeer and all their sleighs, did you try to get them to relieve Captain De Long ? — A. Yes, sir j I did. Q. Did you succeed? — -A. No, sir; when we halted, the natives even took me up on the mountain and pointed out the place, as much as to ?ay where these people were, but I couldn't succeed. Q, And you did your best? — A. Yes. If I had been in good condi- tion I would have forced them. But I was not strong enough to force anybody. Q. You were then suffering from the privations of the journey? — A. Yes. We had insufficient clothes. You might as well say we were naked, Q. And you had been wading three days through the cold water ? — A. Yes. Q. And had been day after day without sufficient food ? — A. We had no food at all that I could call food. Q.° And the last days you had no food at all, so that you were almost starved and in a perishing condition? — A. Yes, sir. By Mr. Curtis : Q. You are here. If De Long and his party had gone with you they would have been saved? — A. Yes, as far as I see now, because there was deer enough and food enough, and facilities to transport them. 10 J Q* 146 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. How loDg were you reacliing this place from the time you left De Long ? — A. It was from the 9th until the 19th when we struck this place. But the natives came on the 22d. Q. You were ten days making what might have been made in one? — A. Yes, but then I did not know the country. I had lost what Captain De Long called the main river. Captain De Long thought he was on the main river, but instead of that he was in the delta. Q. You could have made it in one day if you had known where to go? — A. Yes ; with a dog team. Q. Did you feel confident of getting out? — A. I^o, sir; I never had any idea of getting out. Q. It was a desperate resort? — A. Yes; I told Captain De Long so at the time I left. Q. That you thought you were taking a desperate chance?— A. Yes; I told him I had no hope of meeting anybody. Dr. Daniel F. Collins sworn and examined. By Mr. Curtis: Question. What is your name in full? — Answer. Daniel F. Collins. Q. And of what place are you now a resident? — A. Minneapolis, Minn. Q. What is your profession? — A. Physician and surgeon. Q. And for how long have you been such? — A. Eleven years. Q. I believe you are a native of Cork, Ireland? — A. Yes, sir. Q. So, also, was your brother, Jerome J. Collins ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Something was said yesterday about a payment of money by you to Mr. Bartlett. Will you be kind enough to explain to the committee the circumstances under which that payment was made? — A. I met Mr. Bartlett in New York, and told him that I had been subpoenaed to ap- pear before the Committee on Naval Affairs of the House of Eepresent- atives on Monday, March 31, and supposed that he, with the rest of the survivors of the expedition, was subpoenaed to appear at that time. He said he had not received a subpoena up to that time, and he told me that he had no means; that he had written to his brother for some money, and had no money, or very little, at that time, and asked me would I loan him some money until he would hear from his brother, or brothers, I cannot tell which word he used. I said I could; and I asked him how much he needed, and he told me, and I handed him $50. He told me that he would repay it when he heard from his brother or brothers, which would be about the 12th of April ; and immediately afterward I made a memorandum, among a good many other expenses and outlays of money in my note-book, of the fact that $50 was handed to Mr. Bartlett, and that it was to be returned on April 12th. Q. That is at present in your note book and in your handwriting, and was made at the time ? — A. Yes. Q. So far as you know had he any means to get here except the loan that you made him ? — A. 1 understood from his conversation that he had no means of reaching Washington. Q. And so far as you knew then, unless you loaned him the money, his presence would not have been attainable ? — A. Unless he got the money somewhere else. Q. Now, in a series of preliminary objections that were made here, and are upon file, it is stated that it was at your instigation that the Board of Inquiry was ordered. Will you please state as briefly as possible, giving all the facts, your connection with the Board of Inquiry ?— A. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 147 Shortly after the news of the loss of the Arctic steamer JeaDnette reached me, ruDiors being afloat as to tlie management of the expedition, the conduct of the officers and matters i)ertaining to the expedition, I wrote to General William D. Washburn, of Minnesota, the member from my district, asking him to have or get a special committee api)ointed by the House to investigate the matter. He wrote me back that it would be impossible to have a special committee, but that he would see Mr. Keifer, I think it was, who was the Speaker of the House at that time, about having a resolution adopted, and the regular naval committee authorized to conduct the inquiry. He did so, and the Speaker told him, as he informed me, that owing to the lateness of the session, and the amount of business in the hands of the committee it would be im- possible for him to take up the matter at that late time in the session. He suggested to the appointment of a naval court of iuquiiy to learn the facts. I wrote back protesting against any such court being ai)- l)ointed if it was possible to get a committee of the House. After some- time I received a letter from General Washburn stating that it would be impossible to get a committee, and asking me whether he would offer a resolution for the court of inquiry. I wrote back telling him if there was no other possible way of having an inquiry into the misman- agement of the expedition, that he might use his own discretion in the matter. General Washburn offered the resolution, and the court was ordered. Q. J^Tow, after the court was ordered, state, as briefly as possible, and still giving all the facts, what was your connection with it or its offi- cials! — A. I had no connection with the Court of Inquiry at all. With its officials in the persons of the judge-advocate of the court and Judge- Advocate-General of the Navy, I had three or four, or five, or probably a half a dozen conversations. Q. Name those officers in order? — A. The first officer to whom I talked in relation to the matter was Colonel Eemey, Judge-Advocate- General of the Navy. Q. Where was that conversation held, and when! — A. In his office in the Navy Department; the morning of my arrival in AYashington. Q. When was that! — A. I cannot definitely fix that date without reference to some memoranda. Q. It is perhaps immaterial. Do you remember what month? — A. I could not place the month without looking the matter up. Q. What was said between you and he at that time ? — A. I went into his office and inquired for Judge-Advocate Lemly, and he said that he was not in, and I stated who I was, and entered into conversation in regard to the matter. Q. With Remey ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, go on. — A. He asked me what the trouble was, and I, as well as I remember, gave my ideas of the difficulty. He asked, did 1 know there were papers in the possession of the Secretary of the Navy containing certain charges of Lieutenant De Long against my brother? I said that I had heard so ; and he asked me did I not think it was better that that matter should not come up. I said I thought not ; that 1 was anxious to have the fidl facts of the case. He then told me, says he, " If you bring up this matter you know that De Long's charges will have to go in also ; " and during this conversation ]\lr. Leud3^ came into the room and 1 was introduced to him by Colonel Kemey. I would state that I was not subpoenaed or not requested to appear before the Court of Inquiry. Q. I will come to that. Now go on and give the rest of that conver- 148 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. sation that you had there with Eemey or with Lemly, or with both or either of them. — A. I asked to see the effects, papers and other matter, that were found on my brother's body, and Mr. Lemly told me I could look at them and examine them. I walked down to the old Navy build- ing, I think they called it, talking in a general way on the way in re- gard to the matter, and he spoke to me about the anxiety he had to see me — either to see my brother or myselt^ — in relation to these troubles before there was anything came out about the matter. Q. . He then referred to your living brother ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who are you speaking of 5 Eemey or Lemly? — A. Mr. Lemly. Q. Very well, go on. — A. He said that he disliked very much to have anything to do with the matter in the first place, and it would be far better that the whole matter be left settled and not brought up, as it would not do either i^arty any good, and that there were grave and serious charges in the hands of Secretary Chandler relative to my brother. Q. Did he indicate the nature of the charges'? — A. Ko, sir. Q. Have you any reason to believe that they were other than those contained in the memoranda of Captain De Long that have never been read? — A. No, sir; because he spoke of certain charges being in the possession of the Navy DeiJartment in writing. Q. Have you any reason to believe that they were other than the charges contained in the memoranda that have been read here of Cap- tain De Long? — A. No, sir. Q. Was that all the conversation at that time? — A. He said it was Secretary Chandler's desire and wish to have the matter dropped. Q. Well, what did you say? — A. I said I had come on to Washington purposely to get the charges that were in the hands of the Navy De- partment against my brother and to make them public. Q. Did you make any application for a copy of the charges at that time? — A. I could not say that; my recollection on that point is not positive. Q. Did you receive any? — A. No, sir. Q. Was that all the conversation at that time? — A. That was about the purport of the conversation we held at that time. Q. Which of these two gentlemen did you see first again? — A. I saw Mr. Lemly either that or the next day at the Eiggs House. He took his meals at the Eiggs House, and I saw him there several times. Q. What conversation did you have then? — A. The next time I met him, in speaking of the Court of Inquiry, he said he thought it advisa- ble and better for me not to go there to the sittings unless I was sent for. Q. Well ? — A. I would state that the day before — that is, the day I first went to the Navy Department — Mr. Lemly got the package of pa- pers and other effects of my brother and we examined them together. Q. What became of them? — A. They were replaced in a large brown paper official envelope, as well as I remember, and put away in the Judge- Advocate General's office. Q. Now, go back to the conversation between you and Mr. Lemly at the Eiggs House? — A. He spoke on the matter of the evidence that would be given before the court, and I spoke of my desire that the questions put to the witnesses should be such as would bring out the whole history of the expedition, and particularly everything relating to this difficulty. Q. What difficulty had you reference to? — A. The difficulty between Captain De Long and my brother. He stated that he would ask any questions I submitted if he thought they were proper, but that he would JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 149 ask no questions that reflected on any dead man, and that while he would ask any questions I submitted he would reserve the right to ob- ject to their being answered. As well as I remember that was about the substance of the conversation that day. Q. When did you next have a conversation with either of the gentle- men, Colonel Remey or Mr. Lemly ? — A. I think I met Mr. Lemly again at the Eiggs House, and I think about the words he used were that he thought it would be better for me to employ counsel. I said to him, "Mr. Lemly, what is the good of my emi)loying counsel, if the questions they will put will not be allowed?" Said I, "Any questions that the counsel will be allowed to put by you or by the court, you will put, and my employing counsel would be simply accepting the situation and ac- cepting any treatment that this court might wish to give as far as the admission of evidence is concerned." Q. Well, was there anything further in that conversation 1 — A. He said he thought it was better to have counsel, and owing to his refusal of the questions that we had gone over together, a good many of them, I can't exactly remember them now, I said that I should not employ counsel. Q. When did you next see him or Mr. Remey? — A. I think that was the last time I met Mr. Lemly. Q. Did you meet Mr. Remey again in reference to the subject? — A. I met Mr. Remey I think once or twice in the office, but we had no con- versation in reference to the matter. Q. Are those all the conversations that you now remember that you had with either gentleman in reference to the Board of Inquiry? — A. Those are all. Mr. Lemly, I would state, also told me that I should remember that this Court of Inquiry was a naval court, and that no matter what my evidence was, or what I thought it was, it would be looked at and judged from a naval standpoint, and he used the words " Looked at through naval spectacles." Q. You had a conversation after that with Mr. Remey, did you ?— A. Not except in a general way. Q. Then you have given all the conversations that you now remem- ber that you had with those gentlemen on the subject of the Board of Inquiry ? — A. All that I remember at the present time. Q. As matter of fact, were you ever before that board ? — A. No, sir. Q. As matter of fact, were you ever there with counsel or otherwise? A. No, sir. Q. When was your brother, the deceased, born; how old was he at the time of his death ?— A. Forty years of age. Q. Prior to his embarking in this expedition, what was his profess- ion? — A. His profession was that of civil engineer. He was employed on the New York Herald as director of the weather service that he established, and to write the scientific editorials. That was his princi- pal work. Q. Prior to his embarking upon the expedition did you ha\^ any con- versation or conversations with him with reference to his position on the expedition? — A. After he returned he had made up his mind to go on the expedition, and I believe had some conversations with Mr. Ben- nett on the matter before he went to attend the scientific congress in Paris, which he returned from, and soon after went on the expedition. When he returned he told me that he was going on the exi3edition to do the scientific work. Mr. AuNOUX. Now, I ask the committee whether the declarations in regard to his own work shall be received as facts. I submit that this 150 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. gentleman is telling conversations tliat his brother had with him before the expedition sailed. Mr. McAdoo. The evidence is necessarily secondary, and we will take it for what it is worth. Mr. BouTELLE. Is there not record evidence of the position he held? Mr. Curtis. There is technical evidence of the technical position he held ; that was as seaman. The actual position that he held was that of the person in charge of the weather service of the expedition, Mr. i3ouTELLE. Could he hold any position on board of a ship that was tangible without there was some commission or credentials or some record of it "? Mr. Curtis. I will say, in reply to that, that of course, as is well known and as has appeared in this evidence, this expedition was origi- nated by Mr. Bennett. He paid all its expenses. He fitted out the ship; he furnished it with all its outfit The Chairman. (Interposing.) Here is what Captain De Long says about it himself: I have to re])ort to you Mr. Jerome J. Collins, fsbipped as seaman, United States Navy, in accordance with the suggestion of your i^redecessor That was the way in which he was to get into the Navy. Mr. BouTELLE. Whose predecessor ? The Chairman. The predecessor of Secretary Chandler. Attached to this vessel, and for the purpose of an Arctic expedition, known and by me entitled meteorologist, for disresx^ectful language and deportment and insubordi- nate conduct while in the Arctic Ocean in this vessel under my command. Mr. BoUTELLE. Is not that the highest evidence of what his position was ? The Chairman. He charges him in that shape as a seaman, *' known and by me entitled meteorologist." Mr. BouTELLE. He was detailed as meteorologist the same as they detail a ship's writer and different other things. The Chairman. He says he was known by him as meteorologist. Mr. BouTELLE. Is there not some correspondence that shows the position he was expected to take? Mr. Curtis. Yes ; the correspondence found on liis dead body, and also some correspondence between Connery and Collins. Mr. BoUTELLE. I mean oiScial correspondence. Mr. Curtis. Not outside of what the chairman has read. Mr. BOUTELLE. Are there any letters of Mr. Bennett in regard to it? Mr. Curtis. Not in that record. Mr. BouTELLE. I mean anywhere. Mr. Curtis. Not in our possession, except in reference to the fitting out of the ship. The Witness. I would state that I have in my possession letters from Mr. Bennett in relation to the Washington Post interview. Mr. Curtis. I am coming to that in a minute. Mr. BouTELLE. 1 mean letters written at the time. Mr. MoAdoo. What is the question ? Will the stenographer read the last question and answer? The Stenographicr (reading) : Prior to his embarking upon the expedition, did you have any conversation or con- versations with him witb reference to his position on the expedition? — A. After he returned he had made up his mind to go on the expedition, and I believe had some conversations with Mr. Bennett on the matter before he went to attend the Scientific Congress in Paris, wliich he returned from and soon after went on the expedition. When he returned ho told me that he was going on the expedition to do the scien- tific work. JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 151 Tlie Witness. I will modify the statement, and say, "The expedition that he was going to take charge of the scientific work of." By Mr. Curtis : Q. Before he departed on that expedition were there any conversa- tions between you and him in reference to his exact position on the ship and in which there was anything brought out by anything he claimed De Long had stated ? — A. I asked him if it was not likely that an effort woukl be made to induce him to go as seaman in order to bring him within the rules of the Navy. This conversation took place in Minne- apolis, Minn. He simply lauglied at it. Said it was absurd; that he was goiug on Mr. Bennett's ship, and that the ship was simply put under the control of the Navy Department to have her officered for navigation; that it was Mr. Bennett's expedition, and said, ''It is absurd to think that I will be required to ship as a seaman." I spoke on that very sub- ject to him up there. Q. Did you have any conversation with him in which any reference was made to any statement by Captain De Long and any correspondence in connection therewith as to the position in which he was to go on the expedition'? — A. No, sir; I have no recollection at the present time of any such conversation. Q. Have you in your possession a letter dated New York, April 7, signed by Connery? — A. It is a telegram. Q. Do you know what that was in response to *? — A. I judge and believe Q. No, do you know from any conversation with your brother*? — A. I know from a paper found on his dead body. Q. (Submitting a paper.) I will ask you if that telegram was among the papers found on his body? — A. This telegram was among the pa- pers examined by me in the Navy Department as purporting to be found on my brother's body. Q. Please read it. A. It says : New York, April 7. Jerome J. Collins, Herald Bureau, Washington, D. C. : 1 don't like to give any opinion about the question in your two letters. Your best course is to refer the point to Mr. Bennett. CONNERY. (25 cts. ; paid. ) (The paper last read was marked Exhibit No. 4.) Q. I will ask you, in connection with this telegram, if you had any con- versation with your brother relative to a reported interview with Captain De Long by a correspondent of the Post? — A. I had a conversation with him on the subject in Minneapolis, Minn., when he called to see me before he left for San Francisco. Q. What was that conversation? — A. He spoke to me about the re- ported interview with Captain De Long published in the Washington Bost, and said that he could hardly believe and did not believe it was true. Q. Did he sta^e what the interview was in substance 1 — A. He stated the interview — that Captain De Long had stated to a Washington Post interviewer that the civil scientists, Mr. Il^ewcomb and himself, that were going on the expedition, were going as mere accessories to the sci- entitic work, and he told me that from all the conversations that he had had with Captain De Long he did not believe that interview was true. Q. Was there any further conversation on that subject"? — A. I think at the time, as well as I remember, I would not be positive but that I ex- 152 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. pressed grave doubt but that it was true, and tLat lie probably was placiug- himself in a false position in the matter; but he simply laughed it off, and said, " Oh, it is not so." Q. Was that all the conversation that you can remember? — A. All that I can remember at this time. Q. He assured you from his interviews with Captain De Long it could not be so? — A. Yes ; that it was not so. Q. (Submitting a paper.) Among the papers found upon his body, was that found ? — A. That is a paper that I recognize as among the papers found upon his body. Q. Read that in full. — A. (Reading :) [Arctic steamer Jeannette, beset and drifting in the ice ; lat. 73. 47 N., long. 176. 40 W.] September 1, 1880. Mr. Jerome J. Collins, Metorologist, Arctic steamer Jeannette : Sir : You will be pleased, without unnecessary delay, to furnish me with the fol- lowing-mentioned information, as deduced from observations made between 1 o'clock a.m., August 4, 1879, and 12 o'clock, midnight, August 3, 1880. I.— Temperature. A table showing by months the highest, the lowest, and the mean temperature, with the limits of latitude and longitude for each montli. II.— Winds. A table showing the totalnumber of miles indicated by an anemometer each month, < heir division among and reference to the following true directions, viz : N. N. E. , S. E., S., S. W., W., and N. W., with the greatest, the least, and the mean velocity of each. III. —Storms. Descriptions of any storms of marked importance, with dates, durations, directions, and velocities (greatest and mean) of winds, with their shifts and the corresponding changes of barometric pressure. IV.— Barometer. Charts showing the range and variations of the barometer by days for each month, reduced to a temperature of 32° Fahrenheit. V. Precipitation. A table of the number of inches of rain or snow each month. VI. Miscellaneous. General statements of the relative humidity; number of hours of calms in each month; changes of tem])erature or barometric pressure due to particular winds; the phase of the moon at which the greatest cold occurred; and any other phenouiena which have fallen under your observation. Very respectfully, GEO. W. DE LONG, Lieutenant U. S. Navy, CommamUnf/. (The paper last read was marked Exhibit l^o. 5.) Q. (Submitting another paper.) Did you find that? — A. I recognize til at as received l)y me among the papers. Q. Is that in the handwriting of your brother? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Will you be kind enough to read that on both sides? — A. On one side is this: At midnight, Feb. 2l8t — the reading of the anemometer was 0.4 and not 04., as recorded. Resp'y, G. W. DE L. JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 153 The other side is as follows : The reading at midnight on the 2l8t of the anemometer is recorded 0^., as the tenths of miles are always put in smaller figures above the miles. The record 04. would not mean anything, as there is no such reading. Respectfully, J. J. COLLINS. (The paper last read was marked Exhibit Ko. 6.) Mr. Curtis. That is a reckoniog made by him on a reading made by Captain De Long. Q. (Submitting another paper.) Did you find that letter? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Is that in the handwriting of your brother ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Will you be kind enough to read that distinctly so that all can hear? — A. (Eeading:) Dr. Sir : I return herewith the slip on which you require the numbers of thermom- eters, duly marked. A maximum must be supplied from one of the pocket cases, as the one I had was broken during the storm on our voyage from St. Michael's to St. Lawrence Bay. A ''black bulb in air" (max.) we have not. Permit me to express some surprise that the occupant of the position of meteorologist on this expedition does not come under the opei^ation of your strict rule of "official courtesy," a respect for which, in all transactions, you requested with so much emphasis a little while ago. The contemptuous disregard for my personal feeling as a member of the expe- dition exhibited in several ways and from time to time by yourself and your fellow- officers I can well afford to pass as unworthy of notice, but in my capacity as an em- ploye of Mr. Bennett, and a recognized entity of the official personnel of the expedi- tion by the Hon. the Secretary of the Navy, I regard every act of discourtesy, official and personal, as an infringement on my rights, expressed or implied, by the fact of my appointment. As a new year of work is about to begin for me, it Is of vital importance to me, in many ways, that I should understand the jjosition I am to occupy in relation to that work, to you and to the other gentlemen associated with you. I have been aware from the commencement that the standing you were willing to accord any civilian appointed to take part in the scientific work of the expedition as " a mere accessory," to use the expression you employed to the reporter of the Washington "Post" in April, 1879, when interviewed by him. This was the way in which you endeavored to give place to the statement that all scientific work required would be done by the officers of the Navy. Mr. Bennett, when asked about this, said you must have been mis-reporied. Mr. Connery remarked with some indignation that you never used such language. On these assurances from gentlemen who knew you, as they believed, I decided to come on the expedition, fully expecting to feel at home with a number of men who were said to be incapable of selfishness and injustice. When at San Francisco it was easy for you to tell me that you intended to do thus and so regarding the particular work I was sent to do, and which came under the gen- eral head of physics. A competent man was employed to take charge of the collection, &c., of natural history and ethnological specimens. I was introduced by yourself and others of the officers to people in San Francisco as aperson specially devoted to researches in physical science for the expedition. At the Academy of Scieuces I made some ram- bling remarks, which 1 based on the supposition that I was something more than a "mere accessory." Nothing in your conversation gave me any groundsfor believingotherwise, although you had ample opportunity to enlighten me, until during a general conversa- tion held in your rooms at the Palace Hotel, in the course of which "interviewing" by eporters came up for discussion, you endorsed a lady's statement that the "Washington Post" interview was most faithfully and accurately reported, and that your very words were used, although the reporter did not appear to take any notes. In n moment I saw I was in a trap. Not one set by you, for you did not want anybody but Navy people with you, as your manner of acting plainly showed from the start, aye, from'the first day I met you at the Herald Office. The trap was set by circumstances which will de- ceive any man who, trusting unreservedly to the good nature of others, devotes himself to an enterprise in which he hopes for honor or profit, or both. I hoped for honor in com- ing to the Arctic and also profitable information. I volunteered to come, leaving behind me a happy home, kind and true friends and companions, and many of the things that make life worth living. I volunteered on what was believed to be an enterprise full of danger, and herein lies the big tooth of the trap. I could not under any circumstances, for any cause almost, retreatfrommy post without incurring the slur of cowardice, which, you know would be only too readily cast on any one who backed out at the last moment. Although I foresaw from the start that I was betrayed into a false position by my incon- 154 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. siderate acceptance of assurances, given almost without consideration, that I would not be treated as a " mere accessory/' I could not retreat. Had you told me the day before we sailed that I was to live in the forecastle, and have the work of an ordinary seaman, if I could do it, instead of being treated as a member of the cabin mess, I doubt if I could have gone back. You had and have it in your power to heap or permit to be heaped any amount of disrespect on me, socially or officially, and I was and am as a man with his hands tied. Underthe circumstances I cannot retaliate; lean only resent by silence. Three several times you have threatened me with an exaction of obedience, " if it took every man on the ship," in the discussion of purely suppositious cases of discipline. When I laid before you the facts of one or two cases in which I felt aggrieved by others, you became at once the apologist of one party and did not wish to hear anything about the other. Lately things have been going on rushingly. In my official ca- pacity I am to infer by the withdrawal of several instruments froui time to time that I have either neglected or do not possess the ability to use them. First, the magnetic instruments, one by one ; then x>hotographic apjiaratus, which was spe- cially given in my charge^ and to which all had free access by the exercise of your important "official courtesy." Then I was ordered to have four Six's thermome- ters ready for use. I got these ready, and requested of you that when they were to be used I would be present, as fixing them was a slow and difficult job. You said, ''Certainly, Mr. Collins." But in some time after, and long after, you gave me through Mr. Chipp to understand that the deep-water tests, suspended last fall by your order, would be resumed. You told me to turn over to you the salinometer, &c., as you wanted to make some experiments Avith the sea water. I found next day that you had resumed the water teats and that I was wholly ignored in connection with them, notwithstanding your "Certainly, Mr. Collins." I was directed to give Dr. Ambler the Damets hygrometer, which I did. I don't believe he has used it since. No such explanation such as a kindly courtesy would suggest has been given to me, no more than if I was a lamp-trimmer in the hre-room. Yet if I wanted a little hot water to make tea for my luxurious breakfast during the mid watch, official courtesy demands that I must go to Mr. Melville about it. Don't you suppose I am as sensitive as yourself or Melville or anybody else when I am treated with official discourtesy? You think you can do with me as you please now, and laugh at the future. You are making a mistake common to men of your disposition and habits of self-complacency. (The paper last read was marked Exbibit No. 7.) Q. In connection with that Board of Inqniry, did you receive any let- ters from the stenographer? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many ! — A. I received two letters. They are in the hands of the committee. Q. Now, have you any information by which you can state to us by whom the Jeannette was fitted out and its expenses paid ? The Chairman. That information is contained in the act of Congress. Mr. Curtis. Very well. There is no question that it was Mr. Bennett. Q. How soon after the return of the survivors did yon see any of them? — A. I saw Lieutenant Danenhower, I think, the day after he ar- rived; I would not be positive; it was within three days. Q. And where did you see him? — At the Fifth Avenue Hotel. Q. And in. whose companv did you see him? — A. My brother's. Q. Mr. B. A. Collins ?— a". Yes, sir. Q. Where does he reside? — A. Brooklyn, N. Y. Q. He has been subpoenaed? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What conversation took place at that interview between you and Lieutenant Danenhower ? Mr. Arnoux. That I object to under the rulings of the committee. Danenhower is alive. He cannot be contradicted or impeached until he is examined on the subject. The Chairman. If a witness is sought to be imi)eached, that is the rule, but I do not understand that that is the pur^jort of tlie question. The question is admitted. A. I met Lieutenant Danenhower at the Fifth Avenue Hotel in com- pany with my brother and asked him what was the trouble on the Jeannette between Captain De Long and my brother, and he at first JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 155 positively declined to mnke any statement or give any information on the subject. I told him how uneasily we felt about the fact of charges being made against him, in what a condition of suspense we were about his haviug been arrested and kept under arrest for a long time, and at last he said for us to make our minds easy, that the charges were in no way serious at allj that they did not amount to anything. He then stated to me that my brother had led, as he said, a hell of a life in the Arctic, and that if he had received the same treatment as my brother had to stand he would have gone over the ship's side. Q. And this was stated in the presence of your brother'? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was there anything else said at that interview? — A. There was a general conversation, not on any material point, and just at that time the relatives of Lieutenant Chipp came in, and we withdrew on account of the number of visitors and Mr. Danenhower's time being fully taken up receiving them. Q. Did you ever see him afterwards and have a conversation with him relative to the Jeannette expedition? — A. I think that I met Lieu- tenant Danenhower once or twice afterwards, but I don't remember any definite conversations. Q. Did you have any conversation with him relative to the course that should have been pursued on the retreat, whether to the south or to the southwest 1^ — A. No, sir; I do not recollect any such conversa- tions. I had one or two conversations with him, but I do not at this time recollect anything definitely in relation to the matter. Q. You have a sort of a journal kept by your brother up to Friday the 30th of September ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. (Submitting the book referred to.) Was that book one of the papers found on the body of your brother ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. That is what is termed the note- book, is it ? — A. Yes, sir. (The book referred to is offered in evidence, admitted^ and marked Exhibit No. 8.) By Mr. AUNOUX : Q. When and where did the conversation that you have purported to give between Lieutenant Danenhower and yourself take place? — A. At Lieutenant Danenhower's private room at the Fifth Avenue Hotel. The date, as near as I can fix it, without reference to a note-book, was a day or two after Lieutenant Danenhower returned or landed from the ocean steamer. Q. Was it on the day that Lieutenant Danenhower returned ? — A. It was about 12 o'clock in the day. It w^as the day Lieutenant Danen- hower arrived, or the day after. I would not be positive. I could not state from memory. Q. What was Lieutenant Danenhower's condition at the time that you had this conversation with him?— A, Lieutenant Danenhower's condition was such as I would expect from the history of the expedi- tion — what he had gone through. Q. That gives no light to this committee. I ask you to state without reference to what you would expect. What was his condition at the time you had that conversation? The Witness. Mentally, physically, or in what way do you want it ? Mr. AnNOUX. In any way that you understand the question. — A. I cannot understand that he was sick, but he seemed to suffer with his eye. He walked into the room, and after a time he sat right down on the lounge, and in a minute or two afterwards laid on the lounge. 156 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. Was lie lying, or sitting, or. standing, at the time be made this declaration that you say he made ! — A. He was lying down on the lounge, and 1 thiidi that when lie commenced to make the statement he sat right up on the lounge. Q. How long was the interview with Lieutenant Danenhower to which you have referred'? — A. I should place it at about ten minutes. I could not absolutely say. Q. Had you any previous acquaintance with Lieutenant Danenhower f — A. No, sir. Q. Had you previously seen Lieutenant Danenhower? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you go in company witli your brother to the Fifth Avenue Hotel at the time of this interview with Lieutenant Danenhower'? — A. Yes, sir. Q. When you entered into the room who first spoke? — A. As well as I recollect the occurrence, we sent up our cards and were shown into the room, in which were a number of Lieutenant Danenhower^s friends. He met us in the room and asked us into his private room. Q. Now, sir; please answer the questions I put to you. When you went and had this interview with Lieutenant Danenhower, who first spoke? — A. That is impossible for me to say, sir. Q. Can you tell what was first said in that interview? — A. I think the first thing that was said we congratulated Lieutenant Danenhower on his escape. Q. Did you say that, or your brother? — A. That is impossible for me to tell at this time. Q. When that remark was addressed to Lieutenant Danenhower, what, if anything, did he say ? — A. That is impossible for me to tell. He immediately invited us in Q. (Interposing.) No; I ask what he said. — A. That I cannot tell. Q. Was that part of the con^ ersation in the general room where his friends were, or in the private room ? — A. That was in the general room. Q. When you went into the private room what was the first thing, that was said? — A. 1 think my brother said that we were very uneasy about the rumors that were floating around about the Jeannette expe-_ dition. Q. Did he state in what respect you w^ere uneasy? — A. Yes. Q. What did he say? — A. In relation to De Long's conduct and my brother's arrest and the trouble for wliich he was arrested. We knew nothing about what he was arrested for. Q. Did you state that to Lieutenant Danenhower? — A. Yes; we wanted to know whether it was serious or not. Q. Will you give as accurately as you can the words in which that was said? — A. 1 think we stated to Lieutenant Danenhower Q. (Interposing.) Did both speak ? — A. Yes, we were both speaking. 1 think that my brother spoke first. Q. Tell us what your brother said? — A. He stated that w^e were very uneasy and suffering some mental trouble in relation to the stories being told about my brother's arrest; we wanted to know what it was for — what the charges against him were and the particulars. Lieutenant Danenhower said that that was a matter that he did not care to speak of. Q. Then who commenced to speak? — A. That is impossible for me to tell. Q. When Lieutenant Danenhower said it was a matter he did not care to speak of, what was next said? — A. Lieutenant Danenhower was pressed by both ray brother and myself JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 157 Q. (luterposiug.) What was said? — A. That I canDot remember. This was a general conversation years ago, and I had not a note-book Q. So that your memory fails yon as to the details of that conversa- tion ? — A. My memory fails me as to the exact words, bnt does not fail me as to the purport of the conversation. Q. Now, then, when you pressed him, what next did Lieutenant Dan- enhower say ? — A. Lieutenant Danenliower stated Q. (Interposing.) What did he next say! — A. I cannot tell you that. I can tell you what he stated. Q. Did you have to urge him more than once before he responded 1 — A. Yes. Q. How many times '^ — A. That I cannot say. I did not count them. Q. Then, finally, what did he say? Give his language as exactly as you can. — A. He stated that we might make our minds easy, that the charges against my brother which caused his arrest were not serious. Q. Now, right there. Do you swear that he used the word ^' ar- rest " 1 — A. That I cannot swear, but to the best of my impression and recollection he did. Q. But what I mean is, do you mean to swear positively that he used the word " arrest "? — A. I say, to the best of my recollection, that he used the word '^ arrest." Q. Do you mean to be understood by the committee that you are pos- itive that he used that word ? — ^A. I mean to be understood by the committee to swear that to the best of my recollection and belief now he used the word " arrest." Q. Is your recollection clear that he did use that word ? — A. As far as possible it is. Q. Go on to what he next said. — A. Lieutenant Danenhower in a general way stated how much they suffered coming back on the retreat, and how much his eyes troubled him, and how much he had suffered ; then he was pressed by my brother as to the way that my brother lived on the ship. Q. What did your brother say to him on the subject? — A. He can best tell. Q. Did you not hear it? — A. I heard it, but I cannot recollect the exact words. Q. What was the substance? — A. The substance was, how was Mr. Collins treated on the ship, and Lieutenant Danenhower said he had lived a hell of a life, or been in hell. Q. Which was it? — A. I cannot swear. Q. You swore on your direct examination it was a hell of a life. — A. Yes ; and that if he had been treated the same way he would have gone over the ship's side. Q. What further was said? — A. The conversation was interrupted at that point by a notice that Lieutenant Ohij^p's relatives had arrived and were very anxious to see Lieutenant Danenhower, and we left. Q. Did you pursue the conversation any further than you have given? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you inquire any reasons for his stating that he would have gone over the ship's side? — A. Not that I recollect at this time. Q. Now, was Lieutenant Danenhower sitting up or lying down when you first commenced this conversation? — A. Lieutenant Danenhower was in the outside room and walked in with us. Q. I am speaking about the conversation you had in the inside room. When you first commenced that part of the conversation was he sitting, standing, or lying down? — A. He was lying down, sir. 158 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. Then when you two gentlemen went into the private room did he go in with you! — A. You are mixing it all up in your questions. Q. Will you answer my question. When he went into the private room did you two go in with him? — A. When we went into the front room he was standing in the middle of the floor and advanced to meet us. Q. Did he go with you into the inner room! — A. Yes, and shut the door. Q. Then you three were together in the inner room ! — A. I think Mrs. Danenhower was there for a few moments to the best of my recollection. Q. In the inside room ! — A. Yes, sir. Q. While Mrs. Danenhower was there did any part of this conversa- tion transpire! — A. Not to my recollection. Q. Did you sit silent while 3 on were in the inner room and Mrs. Dan- enhower was there! — A. We were introduced to Mrs. Danenhower, and Mrs. Danenhower stated that a good deal of the joy she felt at meeting her son was marred by the grief she felt at so many men being lost on the expedition. Q. Was that said in the inside room! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was that said before the other conversation commenced! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was Mr. Danenhower then sitting or lying down! — A. I think he was sitting at that time; I could not be positive. Q. In what part of the conversation was it that he laid down! — A. He laid down on the lounge very soon after we went into the room. Q. How many minutes do you say you were in the inside room! — A. We were in the inside room all the time. Q. You first said that you were in the outer room and that you had greetings! — A. Nothing of the kind. Q. Did you not say that in the outer room you congratulated him on his return! — A. I simplj^ said that as we passed in he shook hands with us, and he showed us into the inside room. Q. Did you not say that when you saw him in the outer room you congratulated him on his return! — A. Yes; while we were walking into the inside room. Q. But you had that much conversation in the outside room! — A. While we walked through the doorwijy from one room to another; the outer room was very much crowded. Q. Now, did you have any conversation with any of Lieutenant Dan- enhower's friends at the time! The Witness. In the outside room! Mr. Arnoux. Anywhere. A. With Mrs. Danenhower in the inside room. Q. Is that the only one! — A. The only one I recollect. Q. Did she or any one tell you that Lieutenant Danenhower was suf- fering at the time, and did you not see compresses on his eyes! — A. I don't remember any one stating anything except Lieutenant Danen- how^er that he felt weak. But he had something over his eyes. I think that he had been to the physician that day; if I don't mistake he said so, and that he had something over his eyes, I don't know what it was. At this late date I do not recollect. Q. Now, sir, did he use the words '^ship's side"! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did lie use them more than once! — A. Not tliat I recollect, except in reference to the statement I have made. Q. Did he use them more than once in reference to that statement! — A. No, sir; not to my knowledge. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 159 Q. Then I ask you, as a matter of fact, did he use the term more than once?— A. To my recollection, nob more than once. Q. Did he use the words ''ship's side" in any other connection than that you have given!— A. Not to my recollection at present. Q.'^Is your recollection accurate on that! — A. Excellent. Q. Then, according to your recollection, are you as willing to swear that he only used the words "ship's side" in that connection as you were willing to swear awhile ago about the other word that he used? — A. What other word? Q. Do you remember the word I asked you if you were positive about? — A. I do not know what word you asked me about. If you will tell me I will tell you whether I remember it. Q. The word I asked you about was "arrest."— A. Yes, I am as pos- itive. Q. Now, are you as positive that he only used the words "ship's side" once as you are that he used the word "arrest"?— A. I am as positive that he used the words " ship's side " as " arrest." Q. Are you as sure that he used the words "ship's side" in the con- necnection that you have given as you are positive that he used the word "arrest"?— A. Yes, sir. Q. When was it that you next had a conversation with Lieutenant Danenhower? — A. I think the next time I had a conversation with Lieutenant Danenhower was in Washington. Q. That does not answer the question when it was. — A. I think about the time of the Court of Inquiry, to the best of my recollection. I won't be positive, however. Q. When was it that you had the third conversation with him ?— A. I think I met Lieutenant Danenhower in New York, and the third con- versation was on board the free ship. Q. I ask you when ? — A. When the bodies arrived. Q. Can you give any idea of the month or year or time? — A. Well, it was the last part of February that the bodies arrived. Q. What year?— A. This year. Q. 1884?— A. Yes. Q. Have you since you have been in Washington had au}^ conversa- tion with Lieutenant Danenhower? — A. Yes. Q. Have you ever had any correspondence with Lieutenant Danen- hower ? — A. In relation to a letter received by me from my brother, I think, stating that Lieutenant Danenhower felt sore or felt annoyed that the impression had been created among the newspapers that he had told me all relating to the expedition. I wrote a letter to him stating that I never made any such statement to any newspaper. Q. Did you ever write more than one letter to Lieutenant Danen- hower? — A. It is possible, but not to my recollection. Q. About what time was it that you wrote the letter to which you have referred? — A. That was during the court of inquiry, I think, while he was in Pennsylvania at Chad's Ford, or some place like that. Q. Did you ever write to him on the subject of that conversation which you stated you had with him in the Fifth Avenue Hotel. The Witness. In reference to that special conversation ? Mr. Arnoux. Yes. A. No, sir 5 I never did. I wrote to him in relation to a letter re- ceived from my brother. Q. When did you first hear any rumors affecting your brother or against this expedition? — A. Shortly after the news of the failure of the expedition reached this country. 160 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. Can you tell when that was *? — A. I cannot fix the exact date. I fix the date of the news as arriving, and some time after that. Q. When did you first have any conversation with Fireman Bartlett? — A. I think 1 met Fireman Bartlett in New York for the first time last February or March. I might have seen him before, but I won't be positive. To the best of my recollection I think it was about that time. Q. Did he, at your instigation, write the letter Avhich you produced the other day ?— A. I stated to Mr. Bartlett Q. (Interposing.) No; answer my question. Did he write the letter at your instigation ; yes, or no 1 — A. I Avould state that I told Mr. Bartlett that 1 was desirous of procuring a Congressional investigation into the Jeannette expedition, and in order to do so it was necessary, or would be proper, to show that the survivors, or a number of tbe survivors, thought it was necessary, and 1 asked Mr. Bartlett if he had any objection to so stating and he said he had not, and I asked him to reduce that statement to writing, which he did. Q. When was tliat conversation 1 — A. To the best of my recollection that was on the 23d day of February. Q. From whom did you obtain the material which was embodied in the petition sent by you to Mr. Washburn and presented by him to Congress *? The Witness. Which; this last? Mr. Arnoux. Yes. A. From information derived from papers found on my brother's body, from statements that 1 had learned Mr. John P. Jackson, the New York Herald correspondent, had made as to his investigation into the matter, from the remark that Lieutenant Danenhower had made at the Fifth Avenue Hotel, and from the general gossip and drift of talk that was going about in relation to the matter. Q. Had you seen Mr. Jackson personally ! — A. No, sir. Q. Had you any other papers than those which you have presented to this committee ? The Witness. In relation to what ? Mr. Arnoux. In relation to the matter on which you based the pe- tition. A. I have a half a trunk full of papers, as far as that is concerned. What do you mean ? Q. Did you say just now that the petition was based upon the papers which you believed to have been on your brother's body 1 — A. Partly; yes. Q. Have you presented those papers to this committee ? — A. All of them in relation to his treatment. Q. Did he have a note-book, among others ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Is that note-book here ? — A. Yes. Q. Will you state to the committee what that note-book in general consists of? — A. It consists of a general history of the party in a short, condensed form, from the time the ship was lost to September 30, I think. Q. Tlien, if I understand you aright, this is a brief diary of the events that transpired from the time of the loss of the sbip to the time he finished writing 1? — A. Very brief; yes. Q. Has that ever been printed *? — A. Yes. Q. Is it contained in the record of the Naval Court of Inquiry 1 — A. In one part of that report it is stated that it is ; but it is not. Q. There is a reference made to that, and an explanation 3 but is JEANNETTE ll^JQUIRY. 161 there any copy of it printed that is in the hands of the chairman ? — A. There is a copy of it in the hands of the chairman of the committee. I would also state that the memorial was based on statements made by Mr. Newcomb to my brother in Kew York, and also statements made by Mr. Newcomb to me while in New York — this last memorial. Q. Will you tell me who stated to you that other members of the ex- pedition besides your brother were treated with every outrage '^ — A. Mr. Newcomb. Q. Did he say that all the members of the expedition were treated with every outrage? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Every outrage? — A. Well, every indignity or Q. (Interposing.) I ask you that word? Did he say every outrage? — A. Yes. Q. Do you swear that he did? — A. I swear that he used the word "outrage" with the meaning of indignity. Q. I do not ask what the meaning was. Did he use that word, and say that other members of the expedition were treated with every out- rage? — A. To the best of my recollection, yes, sir. Q. When did he tell you that?— A. In New York City. Q. I say when ? — A. In February of this year. Q. Did he tell you who of the members of the expedition besides your brother he claimed were treated with every outrage? — A. He stated himself. Q. Did he state anybody else? — A. He stated that Lieutenant Dan- enhower was very badly. treated. Q. No, no; but I am saving with every outrage? — A. He stated him- self. Q. You say your brother and other members, in the plural. Were there any other members besides your brother and himself who were treated with every outrage? — A. I do not recollect. Q. Do you understand that suspension and arrest in the Navy mean the same thing ? — A. Not being familiar with the technicalities of the Navy, I cannot answer." Q. I ask you what you understand, sir? — A. My understanding is that they amount to the same thing practically. Q. When you used the words '' suspension, or arrest," did you mean the same thing or a different thing?— A. When I used the word "sus- pension," I meant that it was an absolute arrest without the i)liysical fact of being locked up. Q. When you use the word " arrest," what do you mean by that as a physical fact? — A. A suspension with being locked up. Mr. BouTELLE. Locked up? The Witness. Deprived of personal liberty. By Mr. Arnoux: Q. Who was it that told you that several volunteered on the 3d of October to go in search of their missing shipmates? — A, I do not rec- ollect that I made that statement. Q. I read to you from your petition this : On the :kl day of October following he said Melville had fully recovered and with him all his men, and that several of the party urged him to push ahead and not delay, several volunteering to go in s. arch of their missing shipmates. And I ask you, having read that to you, who told you that on the 3d day of October several volunteered to go in search of their missing shipmates? — A. In the first place, I don't know from that that you read that I made any such statement. In the noxt place I do not know that 11 J Q* 162 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. that is a correct copy of the statement that I made. In the third place the language that you use there is no evidence that I made the state- ment or meant to convey the impression that Mr. Melville recovered on the 3d of 1. ctober and that men volunteered on exactly the same day. Q. Were you told by anybody that on the 3d day of October sev- eral volunteered to go in search of their missing shipmates ? — A. I was informed that from the day the party reached Mr. Arnoux (interposing). I did not ask what you were informed, and I think the committee ought to say that I have the right to ask a question of that kind and receive an answer without the witness making a statement which does not reply to my question. I ask him was he told that on the 3d of October several volunteered to go in search of their missing sbipmates. That is a question that can only be answered yes or no. What I want to know is, if anybody did inform him that on the 3d of October anybody volunteered to go in search of their missing shipmates. The Chairman. He can answer what the fact is. The Witness. I have no recollection as to the exact date. By Mr. Arnoux: Q. Did any one inform you, or were you informed in any manner, that on the 3d of October Melville had fully recovered, and with him, all his men? — A. His recovery is stated in his evidence before the Court of Inquiry. Q. Is that all you know on the subject? — A. I was so informed by Mr. Bartlett also. Q. Who told you that Melville gave no directions or adopted no means for spreading the news of the missing boat? The Witness. At what time ? Mr. Arnoux. At any time. A. Mr. Bartlett. Q. Who told you that the Court of Inquiry ruled out nearly every question that would bring out the true history of the expedition? — A. I judged so from the report. Q. On that you wholly base the statement which you made in your petition, do you?— A. And the statement that Mr. Lemly made that he would not ask any question that reflected on a dead man, and the state- ment that he would reserve the right to object to any questions that he pleased. Q. Does that prove to you that he ruled out nearly everj^ question that would bring out the true history of the expedition ? — A. I think in the light of the Court of Inquiry and the light of the testimony given here, it is pretty conclusive. Q. You think so? — A. Yes. Q. But I ask not for your opinion but the fact. Was that the opinion, or what you based your statement upon? — A. It was one of them. Q What was the competent authority that you referred to when you said that "many of the witnesses by competent authority were at the time dei)endent upon, under the jurisdiction of, and afraid of the i)erse- cution of the Naval Dai)artment"? — A. The ofiticial stenographer of the Court of Inquiry. Q. Was that the only authority ? — A. That was the only authorit5% I judged it was good authorit^^ — the official stenographer of the court. Q. Do you know whether your brother was notified of the sessions of this Court of Inquiry and invited to be present? — A. I cannot tell as to that. JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 163 Q. Where was it that you had your first conversation with Colonel Eemey ? — A. In his room in the iJ^avy Department. Q. Was it there also that you had the first conversation with Mr. Lemly 1 — A. Yes -, in another part of the room. Q. About what date was it that you had the first conversation with Kemey and Lemly ! — A. That I could not fix without reference to some- thing Q. (Interposing.) As nearly as you can recollect now ?■— A. It was in the early stage of the Court of Inquiry. I could not fix even the month without a definite reference to dates. Q. Is not your memory of dates good '?— A. It is ; but the time has elapsed so that I could not tell. Q. Was it p^fter you had tbis conversation with Lieutenant Danen- howerf — A. Yes, sir; necessarily. Q. Have you given the entire conversation that you had on that occasion with Mr. Lemly ?— A. As well as I can possibly recall it at the present moment. Q. Did you, at that interview, see the papers which it was alleged had belonged to your brother ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. In what condition were those papers at the time you first saw them! — A. They were put up in a package with some odds and ends that were found, and had much the appearance that they have at present. Q. Were any of them, and if so what, matted together as if they had been in a wad f — A. Yes. Q. Was the note-book a part of that wad !— A. That I cannot recol- lect. Q. Was the part which they said was written on some sheets of fools- cap a part of the wad ? — A. That I cannot recollect. Q. Were not the telegram, that letter which you have read, and let- ters generally the papers that comprised that wad !— A. ISTo, sir; to the best of my recollection they were all loose. Q. Do you recollect what papers they were that comprised that wad ? — A. That I do not recollect. Q. Do you recollect any of the papers that Avere in it? — A. I can give you an idea what papers were in the entire package. Q. ]So, I am speaking now of the papers that were together in the wad. — A. Ko, I cannot. Q. Did you have any trouble in opening them to keep from breaking the leaves! — A. They had been examined before- Q. (Interposing.) Do you know that they had been!— A. So Mr. Lemly told me. Q. I ask you if you know ! — A. So he told me. I was not there. Q. Was there any difficulty in examining those papers! — A. No, sir. Q. Was it in that conversation that you told Mr. Lemly that you came there to get and make public those charges against your brother! — A. To the best of my recollection either there or at the Eiggs House. Q. I want to know which it was.— A. That I cannot state positivel3\ Q. Can you, by reflecting, tell whether that was a part of the conver- sation that you had at the time that you were at the Department in the first interview you had with Lemly, or subsequently! — A. My impres- sion is it was at the Department. Q. When was it you had the next interview with Mr. Lendy ! — A. I think it was that afternoon, or the next day at the Eiggs House, 164 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. When did you have the third interview with Mr. Lemly? — A. At the Riggs House. Q. I said wlien? — A. They were consecutive, one day after another. Q. Then you had the first two conversations on the same day, and the third conversation on the next day ?— A. I saw Mr. Lemly in the morn- ing at the Nav3^ Department, and I won't be positive whether I saw him that afternoon at the Riggs House or not. I think he made an ai)])ointraent with me there and did not keep it. Q. I am not asking you when you did not see liim; I am asking you when you did see him. — A. I am prett^^ positive I saw him the next day, and at the Riggs House. Q. Altogether how many interviews did you have with Mr. Lemly? — A. I should say three or four, to the best of my recollection. Q. After seeing Mr. Remey, did you see him again to have any con- versation with him in reference to this matter? — A. I have no knowl- edge of any conversation with him particularly on that subject. Q. Did any part of the conversation which you had at the Depart- ment with Mr. Lemly take place in Colonel Remey's presence'?— A. No, sir; we were on the other side of tlie room. Mr. Remey was not pres- ent, except when we were introduced, when a general conversation took place. Q. Was it at the Riggs House, in the second interview, that Mr. Leml^^ said to you that you had better not go to the sessions unless sent for! — A. Yes. Q. Was it in that conversation that you said you desired to bring out every thig about the expedition! — A. I told him that at each and every conversation. Q. Did you tell him that in the first conversation! — A. To the best of my recollection I told him I wanted all the facts out in relation to the expedition. Q. Did you tell him that in the first conversation! — A. In the first, as well as my memory serves me, as in the others; more particularly in the others. Q. Did you tell him in the first conversation that you desired to bring out everything about the dif&culty between your brother and Captain De Long! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you tell him that at the Department! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you tell him that at the Riggs House! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you tell him that again at the second conversation at the Riggs House! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you tell him that in the fourth conversation! — A. Yes, sir. Q. In each and every conversation you had with Lemly, that you wanted the truth known! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you think at that time from anything that you had learned that the difficulty between your brother and Cai)tain De Long had any- thing whatever to do with the loss of the Jeannette! — A. I believed that the difference between the officers (^. (Tnteri)osing.) I say between your brother and Captain De Long. I am not asking you about the officers. Now please to confine your- self to answering my questions. A. What is the question! Q. Did you believe at that time that the difficulty between your brother and Captain De Long had anything to do with the loss of the Jeannette! — A. Well, I could not think that, because he was not a seaman. Q. Did you understand that the naval inquiry was in reference to the JEA.KNETTE INQUIRY. 165 loss of tbe Jeaiiiiette'? — A. My under standiDg of the naval inquiry was tbat it was an inquiry into the loss of the Jeannette and the conduct of the officers and men. Q. Did you understand that it was their general conduct, or such conduct as contributed to the loss?— A. That I could not say. Q. In which conversation was it that you had with Mr. Lemly that he suggested to you that you should employ counsel ? — A. It was in the last conversation. Q. Had he previous to that time made such a suggestion ? — A. I think he did ; I would not be positive though. Q. Having given as fully as you can all the conversations between Mr. Lemly and yourself, and having told nothing about writing out any questions, how did it happen that you did write out and send to the judge- advocate in that investigation questions to be put to the witnesses'? — A. I left in Mr. Lemly's hands a number of questions written bere. Q. How came you to take that coursej had anything in conversation led up to it? The Witness. How do you mean 1 Mr. Arnoux. Had there been anything said in the conversations you had with Mr. Lemly on the subject of writing out any questions to be put 1 — A. Mr. Lemly asked me to leave him or send him what questions I wished to ask, and that hewouUl reserve to himself the right to object to any questions that reflected on any dead men, and that any ques- tions he did not think proper he would object to. Q. Did he state in what way you might possibly ask improper ques- tions'? — A. No, sir. Q. Did he state to you that the court followed any rules of evidence, and that hearsaj^ evidence was excluded? — A. It is possible; but not to my recollection now. Q. Did he give you any reason why he wanted no questions put in regard to the dead men? — A. No; not to my recollection. Q. Was that the whole conversation on that subject?— A. That is the substance. Q. Did you remonstrate against it ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What did you say in remonstrance? — A. I stated that it was uu- fair; that we wanted these questions asked, and he said he felt it his duty as judge-advocate to object to any questions he saw fit. Q. And you thought it would be untair for him to object to any ques- tions you chose to put"? — A. Any questions that would bring out the facts of the expedition. The joint resolution i^rbvided for investigation into the conduct of the officers. Q. And you understood that to refer to all the gossip, and scandal, and petty quarrels, and misunderstandings that might have taken place during the whole time they were together, did you? — A. I supposed the resolution of Congress intended to bring out everything in relation to the expedition. Q. And everything that was said between the officers on board the vessel ? — A. Not necessarily. Q. In other words, did you understand that resolution to be that they were to wash all the dirty linen thej^ could possibly? — A. No; I don't think they could have done so in the short space of time the court sat. Q. And you did not think that was a part of their inquiry? — A. I thought it was a part of their inquiry to get all the facts in relation to the expedition out and as to the conduct of every man on the expedition. Q. And that is what you understand this investigation to be now? — A. Yes; to get at all the true facts of the expedition. 166 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. And do yon think it is a matter of the slightest moment to a na- val conrt of inqniry to know what was said between two officers where it had nothing whatever to do with the management of the ship or the ultimate results of an expedition? — A. That is a matter I would leave to the committee or the court to decide for themselves. Q. Was your brother a married man'? — A. No, sir. Q. What was your brother's age when he left Cork? — A. He left there in 18G4, I think. Q. What was his age? — A. Well, he was 40 when he died. Q. Is that the best answer you can give to my question? — A. He was 23. Q. What education had your brother when he left Ireland ? — A. He received a classical education at Saint Vincent's Seminary, the principal school in that portion of the country. Q. Did that embrace a scientific course? — A. Yes. Q. To what extent? — A. To the usual extent taught in these semi- naries. Q. To the extent of the high schools? — A. The standard of the high schools there is considerably different from here. Q. Can you tell me to what extent his classical education was car- ried? — A. That I cannot tell. I was never at that school, and it is im- possible for me to tell each and every branch of the study. Q. Do you know anything about any branch of the study there? — ■ A. I know they teach all the English branches and all the classical studies and modern languages. Q. Do you know to what extent they carry study in any branch in that school? — A. I was not there; I cannot tell. Q. Do you know whether they go beyond what would fit a student in that school for college? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know how far in the collegiate course the curriculum there extends? — A. That wouhl be impossible for me exactly to determine. Q. Were you in tluR conntry at that time? — A. No, sir. Q. Where were you ? — A. 1 was there. Q. Were yon at the same school? — A. No, sir. He was nine years older than I. Q. Were you at the same town ? — A. Yes, naturally. Q, Did yon go to the same school with your brother? — A. No, sir. Q. At no time? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you afterwards go to the same school? — A. I went to a branch of it. Q. To the same school your brother did?— A. The old school was discontinued. Q. Did they not have the same professors and tutors? — A. No, sir. Q. Did they give up all their tutors, as well as the school? — A. The whole thitig was reorganized. Q. When did you see your brother first after he came to this coun- try? — A. 1 came with him. Q. Where did he land? — A. In New York. Q. What did he undertake to do? — A. He was one of the civil engi- neers on the Northern Pacific Eailroad. Q. In wliat capacity did he work on the Northern Pacific Railroad? — A. As civil engineer. Q. In what capacity? — ^A. He was in the engineer department in the city of New York. Q. How long did he remain in that? — A. That I cannot possibly answer. JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 167 Q. As near as you can recollect? — A. That would be 1mi)ossible for me to tell without hunting the matter up. Q. When did he go into the employ of the Northern Pacific Eailroad in their New York office? — A. That would be impossible for me to tell. Q. Can you give the year? — A. I think it was 1866. Q. And have you any idea about how many years he remained there ? — A. I could not tell. I think he left there to take charge of the rec- lamation of the New Jersey meadows, what are known as the swamp lands of New Jersey. Q. About when was that?— A. That was in 1867. Q. Do you know under whom he was? — A. He had charge of it. Q. Who was the party who employed him? — A. The New York Iron Dike and Land lleclamation Company. Q. How long did he remain in their employ? — A. I think it was until the work was finished. Q. It is not finished yet.— A. That part of the work was finished. Q. Can you tell me how long he remained there? — A. I could not possibly. Q. Have you any idea how many years he was employed there? — A. It must have been two years or so. Q. Down to what time in what year was it that he left them? — A. I could not positively fix these dates. Q. Give as nearly as you can what year it was your brother left the New Jersey Improvement Company?— A. In 1868, or along there. Q. What did he next do? — A. Next he was chief engineer of the Marsh Land Company in New York, and one of the directors. Q. What property did they have charge of? — A. They had charge of the reclamation of lands, and the purchase of lands under the act incor- porating the company in appointing commissioners to condemn lands. Q. But I say what lands did they have charge of? — A. All the swamp lands in Kings, Queens, and Eichmond counties. Q. How long did he remain in that company? — A. He remained in that company, I think until, the time that he went on the Herald weather bureau. Q. Do you recollect what year that was ? — A. That I could not fix. Q. And from that time on did he remain in the Herald weather bureau until the starting of the Jeannette expe'Jition ? — A. He made a proposi- tion, as I remember it, to Mr. Bennett to cable storm warnings to Europe and make predictions of the weather. Q. I do not ask about that. I ask if he remained there ? — A. I am just giving you an outline. Q. I am not asking for an outline. — A. He remained there, with the exception of being a delegate or representative to the Meteorological Congress in Paris. Q. Was he in the employ of the Herald or had he left the employ of the Herald when he went to Paris ? — A. He was in the employ of the Herald. Q. Then I ask you was he in the employ of the Herald from the time that he went there until he went on the Jeannette expedition ? — A. Yes, sir. Adjourned. 168 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Washington, D. 0., Wednesday, April 9, 1884. The subcommittee met at 10.30 a. m., all the members thereof beiog present j also counsel on either side. Daniel F. Collins resumed the stand. The Witness. Mr. Chairman, before the counsel resumes his ques- tions I would like to add a little to the testimony I gave yesterday in relation to the interview with Mr. Danenhower at the Fifth Avenue Hotel, in the fact that he spoke to me at that time about the Sunday that several of the members of the expedition left the ship and went to liunt a bear. I repeated it in my first statement, but forgot it for a moment yesterday. By Mr. Arnoux : Question. In regard to the interview that you had with Lieutenant Danenhower, will you state now, as fully as you recollect, all that he said in regard to the bear? — Answer. Yes, sir. He stated that a bear was seen off the ship on Sunday when the ship was near Herald Island, and that Mr. Niudemann, himself, and my brother, and I am not sure whether there was a fourth party, went after the bear. Mr. Mndemann was in advance, and they hunted the bear for a time, when he rec- ollected that the ship had to be prepared for inspection, and he returned, and that the others followed up Mr. Mudemann, not knowing but he might get into trouble or receive some injury, and that when he re- turned to the ship the captain asked him who was absent, and he ex- plained to the captain, and that an order was issued next day that no one should leave the ship without special permission. Q. Was that told you by Lieutenant Danenhower before or after the other part of the conversation which you detailed yesterday? — A. That I could not be positive about. Q. As near as you recollect? — A. That I hsive no recollection of. Q. Can you not recollect whether that was before he told you that your brother's life had been such an uncomfortable one? — A. I have no recollection on the point. Q. Can you state whether it was before or after the time that he said to you, as you have given it, that if he had been in your brother's place he would have gone over the shiji's side ? — A. I have no recollection on the point. Q. Then you have no recollection of the sequence of the conversation that took place at the Fifth Avenue Hotel? — A. I have a general recol- " lection, but no specific recollection, whether that statement was made before or after he made the statement of the life my brother led. Q. Now, I ask you if you have any recollection of the sequence of that conversation? — A. I have given the conversation in about the se- quence as I understood it. Q. Did he make any comment upon the order which you say he told you was given the next day? — A. I have no recollection on that point. Q. Did he tell you in the course of that conversation that it was hell in the Arctic regions for three years ? The Witness. In that conversation did he tell me that was what was hell? Mr. AuNOUX. The life your brother led; that itwas hell in the Arctic regions for three years? — A. I don't remember the wording; I have no recollection at the present time. Q. Did you not, in making your opening statement to the committee, state it in about those words? — A. That was about the substance of the JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 169 remark. But the exact words I gave then as nearly ns I conlcl re- member. Q. No NY that > oil are under oath, and giving them as nearly as you can remember, do you remember that Lieutenant Danenhower said to you that life was hell in the Arctic regions for three years ! — A. I don't remember exactly the words '•'- three years," nor do I remember the words that I used in my previous testimony, when I was under oath as well as now. Q. I am not speaking of the time when you were under oath ; I am speaking of the time when you were making a statement not under oath. — A. At what time was that? Q. When you opened this matter? — A. I was under oath then, sir. Q. The oath had been administered to you, but the statement was not a sworn statement % — A. I considered it so. Q. You did? — A. I was under oath before tliat statement was made. Q. Did you understand that the committee was taking that as testi- mony in the cause ? — A. I have no understanding of what the under- standing of the committee was. Q. I am asking what you understood % — A. I did not pay any atten- tion to the matter. Q. If you had supposed that you were testifying to the matter then, why did you take the witness stand and submit to an examination yes- terday % — A. I did not suppose anything. Mr. OuKTis. It was because I told him so. It was at my direction. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. I want to inquire of you how many conversations you had with your brother before the Jeannette sailed from San Francisco, of which you spoke yesterday ? — A. The conversation lasted all the time — three or four days nearly. Q. Did you have more than one conversation with your brother at Saint Paul? — A. I had no conversation with my brother at Saint Paul. Q. Where did you say you had the conversation with your brother? — A. I stated that it was in Minneapolis. Q. Did you have more than one conversation at Minneapolis? — A. Naturally it should be broken by night-time, if it continued three or four days. Q. I did not ask what was natural. I asked for a fact, not a conclu- sion. — A. That is a fact. We did not sit ui^ all the nights for three or four nights, talking. Q. Do you recollect the date when you commenced to have that series of conversations with your brother at Minneapolis? — A. 1 do not, sir. Q. Give as nearly as you can the date when that conversation took place ? — A. It took place wliile he was on his way to the ship in San Francisco. I think it was in May 'or June, 1879. Q. About June, 1879 ? — A. Either May or June j I could not be pos- itive. Q. Had you at that time read in the newspapers the interview alleged to have been had between Captain De Long and a newspaper corre- pondent which was published in the Washington Post ? — A. No, sir. A. At the time you had the conversation with him at Minneapolis had your brother seen the article in the Washington Post ?— A. Evi- dently he had, or he would not have spoken to me on the subject. Q. You know nothing further than from that conclusion, do you ? — A. No, sir. 170 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. What did your brother tell you was contained in that article in the Washington Post? — A. He stated to me that Lieutenant De Long was reported by the Washington Post as stating or saying that the civil scientists that were going on the expedition, which he understood to mean Mr. Newcomb and himself, were going as mere accessories, and the work proper would be done by naval officers. Q. When he used the word '' accessories," did that strike you as being a word that reflected in any way upon your brother? — A. Most de- cidedly. Q. Did it seem to disturb your brother's peace of mind that he should be called an accessory? — A. He seemed to be annoyed at it, but did not believe that Mr. De Long had made the statement. Q. I only ask you about the word. He was annoyed ; and did you share in his annoyance ? — A. I thought it vfas a very strange remark. Q. I say did you share in his annoyance? — A. Naturally. Q. What do you understand the w^ord accessory to mean? — A. Ac- cessory is one who assists, or one not in charge, not the main person. Q. Did you suppose at any time that your brother was to be in the main charge of the expedition? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you suppose at anytime that Captain De Long was not to be in the main charge of the expedition? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you suppose that the Navy was to be accessory to your brother and Mr. Newcomb? — A. No, sir. Q. Then in what way was this word ''accessory" so oftensive to you and to your brother? — A. From the fact that from the instructions and all the information that my brother possessed at that time, as far as he told me, he was to be in charge of the scientific work that he was sent to do. Q. Would he not still be an accessory of the expedition if that view were true? — A. Well, I suppose you can view the word accessory in a half a dozen lights, if you choose. Q. AYas not, so far as j^ou know, the work that your brother was sent to do limited to the meteorological work of the expedition ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did your brother have any scientific knowledge of deep-sea sound- ings or of the use of transit instruments ? — A. I should judge naturallj^ as a civil engineer. In the first place, I know he had a knowledge of deep-sea sounding, and, secondly, I suppose his profession and general scientific study would give him a knowledge of the other. Q. That is all that you know on the subject? — A. Tbat is all that I know on the subject. Of course I am not prepared to state what he knew and what he did not know. Naturally, I cannot do that. Q. How had your brother acquired a knowledge of deep-sea sound- ings ; you say that you know that he had? — A. I remember that when I was young he took charge of the soundings of the sunken shoals and rocks and of the sea-coast outside Queenstown Harbor, on which one of the large ocean steamers was wrecked. Q. And is that what you call deep-sea soundings? — A. That is what I referred to in my statement. Q. The soundings around one of the harbors of Ireland? — A. It was not in one of the harbors; it was away off the coast. Q. Do you not know as matter of fact that the soundings all the way across the Channel from Great Britain to France are not deep sea sound- ings? — A. I have not studied that subject; that is a thing I am not informed about. Q. You do not know anything about it ? Now, can you state post- JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 171 tively of your own knowledge that, except as he had acquired a knowl- edge of loeteorology in the weather bureau of the INew York Herald, your biother had any scientific knowledge 1 — A. I will state that he did not learn anything about meteorology in the ISTew York Herald weather bureau from the fact that it was he organized the bureau, and he must have had some knowledge before that. Q. What I mean to reach is this: Did he have any scientific knowl- edge outside of the knowledge of meteorology which he displayed in the Herald bureau 1 — A. That is a matter that I could not possibly an- swer. I could not tell what another man's knowledge is upon any subject. Q. Do you know whether your brother knew anything about the ad- justment of portable transit instruments ? — A. If you will explain to me exactly what a portable transit instrument is, I will try to answer. Q. Well, I ask you the question'? — A. I do not know in the first place what a portable transit instrument isj if it is the instrument used in land surveying, he did. Q. Conceding that your idea about that is correct, for how long a time did he have such knowledge, as far as you are aware 1—A. As long as I can remember. Q. (Submitting a paper.) Will you look at the letter which I now show you dated the 5th of April, 1879, and signed Jerome J. Collins, and state whether you know in whose handwriting that letter is"? — A. That is his signature. Q. Can you state whether that letter is in your brother's handwriting or not? — A. Yes, it is in his handwriting to the best of my knowledge and belief. Mr. Arnoux. I propose to read this letter. Mr. Curtis. There is no objection, although we do not know what it is. Mr. Arnoux (reading) : Herald Bureau, TFasJdngton, D. C, April 5, 1879. My Dear Sir : I spent the greater part of to-day at the Naval Observatory, where I preseuted your letters to Admiral Rodgers and Professor Harbness. Both gentlemen express willingness to further our work in every way. The Admiral was less grumpy than usual, I am told, and seemed anxious to he agreeable. He suggested that it would be difficult to manipulate a portable transit instrument on the expedition, and that the sextant should be used principally for determining position. He also re- marked that the Coast Survey people were more familiar with the use and setting up of the smaller instruments than the officers at the Observatory, and that I had better take some instruction from them. However, Professor Harkness told me that he would post me on everything relating to adjustments, &c., and I am going on Monday to take instruction at the Observatory. The drawings of the pendulum were finished this afternoon, and are now ready for the instrument-maker. Lieutenant Perry, of whose kindness and attention I cannot say too much, showed me over the Observa- tary, and took pains to exhibit the principal instruments. If it is possible to get one, we ought to have a chronograph f6r special observations. Perhaps one may be se- cured in New York if not in Washington. For pendulum observations and transits the instrument would be invaluable, as eye and ear noting admits of a serious per- sonal error. However, if we cannot get a chronograph, a good quarter second ' ' stop " chronometer might answer for our work. I mean one wherein a special second hand could he operated so as to measure the duration of movements. The more I see into these operations the more I am impressed with the value of electrical a.gency in operating little mechanisms with precision. If you use a tele- phone there must be a battery or generator, and this could bo utilized for an occa- sional display of the electric light, &c. Please look at the plans of an illuminated "buoy" which Mr. Connery has. My brother sent them to him, I understand. They may be useful for some purpose or other, especially for marking routes, that is to say, paths over the ice, between the ship and a land station during the Arctic night. I understand they burn for a very long time. Captain Franklin, of the Hydrographic Office, has made me acquainted with Lieu- tenants Lyons and Jewett of the Metearological Department of the Navy, both ex- 172 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. ceediugly geuial gentlemoii. Lieuteiiaut Kelly is also attached to tliis department, and has helped to nuike my visit to Washington as pleasant as possible. Let me say that they all speak oFyou with unstinted praise. Suppose you will soon he down this way. Perry says he thinks you are coming during the week. Is this so ? If it is I will he very glad, as we can straighten out many things in a day or two. Yours trulv, JEROME J. COLLINS. Capt. George W. De Long, Neiv York. Mr. Curtis. We also oifer that letter. Mr. Arnoux. There is no '' we also." The letter is in evidence. Mr. Curtis. Are there any more like that! Mr. Arnoux. Yes. Mr. Curtis. Consider that you may read tliem at any time. Mr. Arnoux. I shall read whatever the committee allow me to read. By Mr. Arnoux : Q. Do you know when and where your brother joined the Jeannette? — A. That is a matter I can only fix by his letters. Q. Well, sir? — A. The navy-yard in San Francisco. Q. I asked you also when. — A. I cannot tell when, sir. Q. As nearly as you have any information. — A. I suppose it was as early as June or eTuly, 1879. Q. Do you know that the ship Jeannette had sailed from Havre to San Francisco ? — A. Simply by the report. Q. You have been so informed, have you not? — A. I read it in the papers. Q. Well, you believe as well what you read in the i:>apers, a report about the sailing of the Jeannette, as you do about the statements of Mr. Jackson, do you not ? — A. I, did not state that the statements I heard of Mr. Jackson were in the papers. Q. You said there were some statements in the papers on which you founded your x)etition. — A. I said from the statements contained in the papers found on my brother's body. Q. Did you not say that there were also some statements in the news- papers "? — A. I do not think so. Q. I understood you so. Now, did your brother send to Mr. Bennett, after the conversation that he had with you in Minneapolis, to inquire whether he was placed in such a dreadful position as accessory in that expedition ? — A. I do not know, sir. Q. Have you any inforioation on that subject? — A. Not that I recol- lect at this moment. Poj^sibly by examining carefully a whole mass of papers T might find something. I have no information that I recollect at this moment. Q. J)\d your brother, in the course of the conversation at Minne- apolis, say anything about inquiring of any one to ascertain whether Captain De Long had been properly or improperly quoted in the use of the word "accessory"? — A. Not to my knowledge. I have no recollec- tion at this time about that. Q. Do you know of liis making any inquiry of Mr. Bennett or of Mr. Connery, except as api)eared in the letter. Exhibit Q. R. (page 318) con- tained in the record of the Court of Inquiry? — A. At the present mo- ment 1 do not recollect. Q. Was there not a telegram found on his body, and among those papers, which had some reference to that subject? — A. Yes, there was a telegram. It is in the hands of the committee. JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 173 Q. Do you know what question is referred to in this telegram wherein Mr. Connery says "I do not like to give any opinion about the question in your two letters"? — A. I, of my own knowledge, cannot state that. Q. You have no knowledge on the subject? — A. Of course, personally, I have no knowledge. Q. I see this telegram is dated April 8. Was it before that date that you had the conversation with your brother at Minneapolis *? — A. I stated it was in May or June. Q. Did your brother, in the course of his visit with you at Minne- apolis, say anything about the expected route to be taken by the ves- sel? — A. Ko, sir ; not to my recollection. Q. Did he tell you that the boat had gone to San Francisco for the l)urpose of exploring the Polar sea through Behring Strait "? — A. I have no definite recollection on that point. Q. What is your best judgment as to general recollection *? — A. Well, any effort on my i)art to make a statement on that point would be simply stating Avhat I was not positive of, or what I was not in any way sure of at all. I have no recollection at all on that pointj if I had I should state so. Q. Have you no recollection that your brother said anything to you on the subject of the cruise"? — A. We talked in a general way about the ship going oft on an Arctic exploration — whether they were going by Behring Strait 5 — general talk in that way; but any talk about a definite route to be taken I have no recollection of. Q. But was it not your understanding that they were to go by way of Behring Strait to the North Pole? — A. That was my understanding. Q. Did you know that Mr. Bennett bought, or intended to buy and lit out, another vessel, to go by Spitzbergen, to meet the Jeannette*? — A. I heard something about it. Who I was informed by I cannot pos- itively state; but I think, as I remember the rumor or conversation, it was Mr. Bennett's intention to fit up a ship and send her up the other wa3^ I do not know anything about the purpose of meeting the Jean- nette. Q. Did you hear or know the name of the vessel that he proposed to fit out for that purpose? — A. Now that I recollect, I think that my brother stated to me in New York, before I went to Minnesota, that it bad been Mr. Bennett's intention to send an expedition up there, but he had abandoned the idea. Q. Did he say where he proposed to send the expedition? — A. No, sir ; I cannot recall that positively. Q. Now, what I am asking you is, whether you ever heard that it was Mr. Bennett's intention to send a vessel by way of Spitzbergen to meet the Jeannette when she should go through Behring Strait and come westward ? — A. No, sir. Q. You said yesterday that you were not called or subpoenaed as a witness before the Court of Inquiry. — A. Yes. Q. Did you anticipate that you would be so subpoenaed ? — A. I antici- pated it so much that I wrote to Mr. Washburn on the subject, as well as 1 recollect, that I had received no notification from the court. Q. Were you in any way a party to the exi:)edition ? — A. Not that I know of. Q. Did you know of your own knowledge any fact that would throw any light upon the loss of the Jeannette? — A. Not at that time. Q. Then for what purpose did you expect to be subpoenaed before the Court of Inquiry if you had no information that you could give them on +he subject of the loss of the vessel I — A. I did not say I expected to be 174 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. subpoenaed. I simply said I expected to be notified in some way or my attention called to it. The only notification I ever received was an in- vitation from Mr. Lemly to a personal meeting in Washington with him. Q. The question I put to you was whether you expected to be sub- poenaed, and I understood you to answer that you did'? — A. If I did it was not my intention to do so. Q. In regard to this present inquiry, so far as you are aware, were you not the sole complainant *? — A. I cannot say. Q. So far as you are aware ? — A. From conversations with Mr. ]N^ew- comb, he thought he was very much Q. (Interposing.) No, uoj I am not speaking of what people thought but I am speaking of your attitude in obtaining the present inquiry. — A. This present inquiry was obtained solely through my eflbrts. Q. Now, Judge Curtis, who has appeared here, has appeared as your Ijersonal counsel retained by you, has he not ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And in the examination of the witnesses, have you not largely or constantly framed questions which you have given to him in writing to propound to the witnesses "? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you think, from all that you have learned in connection with this matter, that there was any mismanagement of the exi)edition in starting from San Francisco and going through Behring Strait? — A. That is a question that I prefer to leave to the committee to judge. Q. I ask whether you have any opinion on that subject ? — A. I should prefer to reserve my opinion until all the gentlemen have testified. Q. You are not ready at the present time to form any such opinion? — A. I have not so stated. Q. Are you ready at the present time to form or express such an opinion? — A. I prefer not to. Q. I do not ask .you what it is, I ask you have you formed an opin- ion on that subject? — A. Yes. Q. Now, if it had been Mr. Bennett's direction and wish that the ex- pedition should start from San Francisco and go through Bering Strait, would that influence your opinion in regard to the mismanagement of the expedition ? — A. No, sir. Q. I)o you think it was a matter of mismanagement that the boats' crews did not take pick-axes with them when they landed on the delta at the mouth of the Lena ? — A. I never so stated. Q. I did not say that you had so stated. I ask you the question whether that is your opinion ? — A. On that point I am not prepared at the present time to express an opinion. Q. Have you formed an opinion on that subject at the present time? — A. I have not. I can hardly say that I have. I have not paid enough attention to the matter. Q. Do you understand that when the different boats' crews landed at the Lena delta they had all that they were able to carry? — A. It is my understanding from the evidence given here that when the boats' crew^ landed and i)roceeded on they had a good deal more than they could carry. Q. Now, believing that, do you think it would have been wise, if they had it in their power to make selection, to have left behind some of the things which they carried and to have carried pick-axes instead? — A. I am not prepared to form any opinion with regard to pick-axes. Q. You heard that among the things that were carried was the doc- tor's medicine chest? — A. I understood it to be testified that the doc- tor's medicine chest was carried nearly empty. Q. But they carried the medicine chest with what medicines were in JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 175 it, did you not so understand? — A. Yes j Mndemann said there was very little medicine in it. Q. Now, as a i:)hysician, do you not think it would have been wiser if they had had the choice to have left the medicine chest behind and taken pickaxes? — A. From Mndemann's testimony that there was nothing but compound cathartic pills in the medicine chest, I do not think it would have done them much more good than pick-axes. Q. Then you understood Mr. Mndemann under oath to say that there were compound cathartic pills in it? — A. I either understood him to say that under oath, or it was outside of the committee meeting. Q. (Submitting a map.) I show you a chart on Avhich you will see a dotted line which is stated to be the timber line, which is a degree or a degree and a half south of the delta, and ask you, assuming that that is the timber line, whether you think it would have been judicious in them to have carried axes for the purpose of chopping down trees on the delta? — A. That is a question that I cannot possibly answer, not being an expert in North Siberian travel. Q. You have never had any North Siberian travel, then ? — A. No, sir; fortunately. Q. You said in regard to the money which you loaned to Mr. Bartlett that you made an entry of it in a memorandum book ? — A. Yes. Q. Have you that memorandum book here?— A. Yes. Q. Will you tell me on reference to the memorandum book how many entries you made in that memorandum book prior to the one to which you refer? — A. Fifteen or sixteen. Q. Were they all on the same page ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And were they made at the same time? — A. No, sir; one after another. Q How long prior to the one relating to Bartlett was the first one entered in that book ? — A. I made the first memorandum probably some four or five days before that. I could not possibly state. Q. Did you make them all on the same day? — A. Oh, no. They cover a time of at least a week. Q. How long have you been a physician? — A. Eleven years. Q. In what school did you graduate? — A. Bellevue Medical College Hospital, New York. Q. Is that the regular school ? — A. Yes. Q. And did you have a classical education ? — A. Yes ; I went through a seminary. Q. And after tliafc went through a post-graduate course in medicine? —A. Yes. Q. Besides any influence from the Navy, in your judgment as a physi- cian, all other things considered, would it have been better to put the charge^of an expedition like that of the whale-boat's crew in the care of man who was physically well or of one who had for a year and a half previous been on the sick-list ? — A. I have no evidence to judge Q. (Interposing.) No, I am not asking you on that basis. I put a supposititious question to you?— A. I do not know how sick the indi- vidual was. I do not know what his mental or physical condition was. That is a question that no physician can answer without having all the facts before him. Q. Then it would depend upon his physical and mental condition ? — A. I should say, of course, it would depend upon the condition of the man. Q. But if all other things were equal, and one man was well and the other sick, which in your judgment would have been the proper one to 176 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. hnve put at the head? — A. As I said before, it would depend upon how sick the man was. A-uian might have tooth-ache and call himself sick. Q. If a man called himself sick, even with tooth-ache, and another was well, which in your judgment was proper to put at the head? — A. I do not think the tooth- ache would make much difference. Q. But if a man would make that as an excuse, would you not, under such circumstances, say the other man ought to be put .at the head? — A. If I was at the head and one complained of tooth-ache I would put the other man in charge. I would not certify to the man Avith tooth- ache beiug fit for duty. Q. But if the man were actually sick, so that he was under the care of the physician from the 1st of January of the year previous and down to the middle of June, and had suffered to such an extent that his eye- sight was permanently affected by his sickness, would you not, as a phy- sician, say that it would be wiser, if all other conditions were equal, to put a well man at the head? — A. If the man was totally unlit and not able to assuirie that charge Q. (Interposing.) I did not say totally unfit. — A. I will confine my- self simply to unfit for duty. If a man was unfit for duty I would not have him on duty. Q. I did not x)ut the question if he was unfit for duty, but I say a man sick to the extent which I have spoken of? — A. If a man was sick to the extent you have spoken of he naturally in that condition would be unfit for duty. Q. Do you know the correspondent of the New York World? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know auythiug about the comi)osition of the article which appeared in the New York World on Tuesday, April the 8th ? — A. I neither heard of, saw, or in the slightest knew anything about its com- position, and no one was more astonished to read it than I was. Q. Does that article truly represent your feelings in respect to this matter? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Have you any personal animosities to gratify in this investiga- tion?— A. No, sir. Q. Have you any personal desire to bring discredit unnecessarily on any member of that expedition, living or dead? — A. No, sir. Q. Is it true, as stated in that article, that you have spent $3,000 in procuring testimony to bring before this committee? The Witness. You mean in the way that I have paid foj? testimony or spent it directly Q. (Interposing.) I will read exactly what it is: "But this time Dr. Collins has spent over $3,000 in getting evidence." — A. No, sir; there is no truth in it whatever that I have spent $3,000 in getting testimony together. Mr. Curtis. It must have been written after dinner. Mr. Arnoux. I thought so. I felt that it left the doctor in too shock- ing a })osition to stand as a matter known to this committee, and I knew the counsel would have some delicacy in asking his client in de- fense of that, and I thought it only right to ask him to correct such an outrageous article as that ? The Witness. It is shameful. I am thankful to counsel for calling attention to it. I will state that some one told me that IMr. Austin was the correspondent, and 1 went to him- and asked him about it, and he told me that he did not write it and knew nothing about it. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 177 By Mr. Arnoux: Q. (Submitting a paper.) I show you that letter. Do you know whether that is Mr. Bennett's handwriting? — A. No, sir. Mr. Arnoux. In connection with the question I asked the witness about the course I would like to read a letter from Mr, Bennett. It is as follows ; Stone Valley, Newport, Tuesday t September 2. Dear Mrs. De Long: The inclosed may interest you. I am almost certain we shall hear from them soon, and I shall not give up hope for this year till late in October. Did Captain De Long ever speak to you about which side of the Pole he would attack? I mean, would he attempt to go round by the Russian side and try to get into the Atlantic that way, or come down to the left of Wrangel Land into Baffin's Bay ? Faithfully yours, J. G. BENNETT. Q. I wish you to read to the committee the note-book of your brother. Mr. Arnoux. I would say to the gentlemen of the committee I have read part of ifc, and so far as the evidence has gone in regard to language the most sensitive friend of Captain De Long could not object to any- thing that has been testified to here with the exception of one single word. Mr. Bartlett said that in reiterating an order Captain De Long reiterated it with an oath. But when Bartlett testified he put the thing with another word first, and corrected it and changed it, and then he stood by it. ];:^ow, I think that the journal shows distinctly and clearly, although by inference, that Captain De Long never used any such lan- guage to Mr. Collins. Mr. Curtis. Do not make any argument about it ; read it. Mr. Arnoux. I am only explaining why I want it read. Mr. Curtis. Now, I simply want to call the attention of the commit- tee to page 236 of the record of the Court of Inquiry. You will notice in the testimony of Professor Il^ewcomb this statement : The Witness. He kept a large journal in a wooden box made by the carpenter, Mr. Sweetman. That book, I think, was lost. Further than that I do not know. If this book was the one referred to, I think it was lost with the ship. The journal of Mr. Collins is not here. Neither is that memorandum or series of memoranda or diary, or whatever you may be pleased to call it, that he is said to have kept in a secret way after he was deprived of writing materials. That is not here. And then as you [Mr. McAdoo] were not here during the first two days, I will take the liberty of stating that it appeared in the proof, I think the testimony of Bartlett, that there was apparently much more taken from the body of Collins than was put in evidence here. Mr. McAdoo. I will make a note of that point. Mr. Arnoux. Bartlett said he thought the little bundle of crumpled papers had more to it when he handed it over. Mr. BouTELLE. In looking over his testimony I notice he said be- fore the Court of Inquiry that he knew of nothing that was not repro- duced. Mr. Arnoux. But at this time he thought the package was a little larger, how much larger he could not state 5 that it was a little crum- pled. Now that is all he said about it. Mr. BouTELLE. If any question arises about his testimony we can call him to the stand again. Mr. Curtis. I thought I would call the attention of Mr. McAdoo to it, as he was not here. 12 J Q* 178 JE ANNETTE ^ INQUIRY. Mr. McAdqo. I am very glad you did it. Mr. Curtis. The journal is not here. It is only a note-book. Mr. McAdoo. Is there any evidence that Collins had a journal ? Mr. Curtis. Yes; Professor Newcomb says so on this page [indicat- ing!. Mr. Arnoux. He says he had a large book he kept in a wooden box which went down in the ship. Mr. Curtis. Proceed doctor. The Witness. Do you want me to read everything in the book? By Mr. Arnoux: Q. I mean that part which is a journal. First, I will ask you, was the leaf when you first saw it as it now appears ? The Witness. Which leaf ? Mr. Arnoux. There is a torn leaf just before the beginning of the diary — there [indicating]. — A. Well, titiat, of course, I could not posi- tively swear to, but I should judge so by this thing being colored here [indicating]. Q. You have no recollection ? — A. I have no recollection. Q. Your best recollection, judging by the book, is that it was in that condition when it was first handed to you f — A. I would state that I have no positive knowledge on the subject at all. Q. But I say your best judgment is ? — A. I could not give my best judgment. Q. Is not that your best judgment, by the soiling there ! — A. A day's rubbing might cause that. You can see that yourself. Q. You never tore the leaf out 1 — A. Ko, sir. Q. Goon. — A. (Eeading:) Events of June, 1881. — Party started to island; sighted 16tli May; on morning Slst May boat on sled, provisions, &c., Melville, Nindeinann, Bartlett, Sharwell, Erichsen, Dunbar; island stated to be only 15 miles off; nearly S, S.W. ; really over 25 miles. Party landed on 2d of June; hoisted Hag, &c.; returned end of five days; Dunbar enow-blind ; some of men suffered belly-ache ; very bad traveling ; heavy ice ; over- loaded; ship drifted west, and on 8th broke drift by floe parting ; she was tied up in half berth; on the 11th the ice closed on and crushed her; all hands on ice; ship sunk about 4 a. m., 12th. Evening of 11th captain asked me to read off meteorologi- cal log for him to copy into ship's log ; did so; assisted in hauling stuff to first camp from near ship ; first camp pitched about two hundred yards off; after turned in, floe split right across door of our tent ; turned out lively and shifted everything farther off; bobbed about until evening of 17th jorepariMg" to go south ; nothing ready ; started with a rush, and bursted three sleds first journey ; no experience governing movement ; result, mess of worst kind; men growling among selves at the mismanagement; halted half day for repairs, another day for shelter from rain ; stiff' neck and horrible pain in upper chest third day out ; tried to work ; rubbed liniment ; better after, and worked digging and hauling until the evening (morning) 5th July, when ordered by captain to do no more work, as I was under suspension since Dec. 2d, 1880; " had observed that I worked," &c., when he saw necessity would order me ; was to do no more duty work until reach the United States ! Bien ! Spoke doctor next day (wet) ; said depressing effect of inaction forced on me under circumstances ; no satisfaction beyond platitudes; no stigma attached to me; commanding officer took responsibil- ity, &c. : marched two or three days with the Bashi Bazouks ; then asked if I could clean and carry my rifle ; yes. First day shot a seal ; handsomely recovered by men in dinghy; general rejoicing over fresh meat. Next day shot another seal, which floated until got ; both excellent in stew; got two shots at a youug walrus; finally lost him ; missed a seal at short range on account of goggles ; two days after, about 20, Foxy died. Next day got a shot into head of walrus ; animal dived and came up some 200 yards away spouting blood ; doctor found him swimming, and he and Dun- bar got him after firing five shots into his head ; I got tusks; young bull. Land sighted on morning of Sunday, 10th July; very distant, bearing SW. S.; on day of the Ist, seal killed; wo found it bearing W. X S., and changed course di- rectly for it. Up to 18th or 19th the captain and Dunbar called it water, until we got so close as to see the cliffs. Similar signs of land to S. SE.; 23d killed two seals ; lost first ; sunk quickly ; both shot through head. Several lieavy hauls over JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 179 very open and bad leads, Ibiit ice generally good. Newcomb put under arrest on charges by Danenhower — impudence. Star under arrest, charges by Melville, since 13th ; throwing away a wet slipper which was put on his sleeping-bag. Chipp on duty since IGth and doing well. One day the men worked twenty-two hours ; last spell nine hours, and to bed supperless ; general growling. This occasion of New- comb's trouble. Sent for by Chipj) on 22d, a. m., and ordered from commanding offi- cer to make sketch of land ; did so. Commanding officer said it was his duty to tell me that the emergency demanded his ordering me to do so. I said, '' All right, sir." Made sketch in hve sections. Pencil note-book furnished by commanding officer; handed it over to commanding officer. None of the officers or men yet know where we are, but we are close to island and drifting to SW. This morning about 4 a. m. Goetz killed a bear near camp. A bear chased Sweetman last evening, but got awav when hunted. Eecord of shots to date : 11-51, 12-51, 13-51, 14-51, 15-51, 16-31,17-01, 18-01, 19-51, 110-51, 111-51 ; 4 seals ; 1 walrus killed ; 1 bird hit on wing ; 1 sealmissed ; 1 walrus hit twice. Sunday, July 24tli, evening.— " Turned to" at 8 P. M. Fogp~lat. N. 76° 40', long. E. 151"^ 25', by observation and record in sketch-book. Drifted rapidly past island in fog ; made poor progress otherwise ; many leads with running ice. Passed low point very rapidly, and drifted into the bight inside, which proved a deep bay. Land showed steep cliffs and stony valleys. July 26. — During a. m. turned out and saw land close. High bluff of cliff inside, low valley, but fog shut it again. Evening. — I make a sketch of island from W. to E. Drifting W. rapidly. 27th. — Very rapid drifting. Camped on floe until noon, when ran in toward shore and camped. Heavy ice ; good going. 28. — Made a run for shore, and after several narrow escapes from running ice got on land ice all safe. Went into camp, and after supper com. off", had all hands mus- tered, we marched ashore; flag planted island; *'new discoverj,'^ Bennett Island; three cheers. ^Oth. — Date changed ahead to E. longitude ; sketched face of point ; lots of myrs killed by men ; stone on cliff; latter baysalt and trap coal veins burned very well in and under stones. 31. — Dull day ; suffered two or three days sharp dysentery ; in the evening notified by Chipp to be ready for boat expedition for next day ; got gun ready ; told by capt. to make collections and sketches. Aug. 1. — Left camp at 11 a. m. Boat could not be launched until 4.30 p. m. ; ice too crowded in shore, got off and moved up coast about f mile, and camped on shore ice as we could not proceed; Chipp, myself, Stveatman, Leech, Wilson, Manson, Sharvell, Kuhne, eight in all; good prospect in morning; got away at 8 a. m. and went along coast in very open water about 16 miles and could see on as many more when we turned back ; had driven ashore on foot of slope of an old glacier ; plenty of driftwood, a little moss and grass ; land there low and stony ; collected plants and stones ; found fox jaw, but no'other signs of quadruped life. Got back to camp at 9 p. m. and returned to main camp next day, at noon. Fourth. — All day cold; wet and miserable; eat some walrus flipper and hyde, very good; Dunbar made atrip other side, about 15 to 20 miles, with dog-sled, Aneguin and Alexy ; back one day before us ; found nothing but a walrus tusk and some signs of grouse and foxes ; a bear came to his camp while he was away. Aug. 6th. — Left Bennett Island after breakfast, in boats. They returned and brought off sleds and stuff"; 10 dogs icluding four shot by order Eri'chsen, executor. After dinner went around floe in boats, pulling and sailing; sleds crossed floe; camped bet. com. off. and C. E. Aug. 7th. — Started in boats after breakfast ; shot at seal twice ; missed first, grazed second ; lost him in young ice; abandoned one dog; Alexy two dogs; Johnny Arm- strong, Smike, and Wolf abandoned on ice ; worked through ; fair going, but pulled out twice ; camped ; killed a seal and lost him. Aug. Sth, — Killed a seal after breakfast ; got him ; missed a seal later in day ; poor going for a while, but fair distance made. Aug. ^th. — Shot a seal after dinner, would have got him but not allowed to shoot toward bow ; passed a young hoojuk ; he dived before I could shoot ; good going. Aug. 10th. — Encamped; shot a seal from boat ; very good hit; lost him; shot an- other during dinner halt ; lost him ; fair to middling going, from 10th to 17th good. 17th. Fired at hoojuk on ice ; several came around camp water but none got, though two hit by myself and Bartlett ; killed three seals ; lost them ; quite a num- ber of seals showing. 18th. A poor day's work until evening, when got through pack; strong stormy wind from northwest ; snow ; opened pack at camp ; shook tilings up ; some tents had to be moved back ; cold and miserable. 19^/i. Pack all slack ; safely aboard and under way ; made about ten miles before dinner, and had meal in boat ; were going well when second cutter showed signs dis- 180 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. tress; fibe was stove in, and had to be hauled out for repairs ; lost three hours; much troubled by moving ice; finally got away, and made considerable distance until the wind went into east with southing ; when, after supper, hauled out on iioe and camped ; we are now in the open water, and preparations made for boat voyage to the nearest coast; everything extra thrown away; ammunition and guns distributed; don't think our position is known; my gun went wholly out of commission on 17th ; used Chipp's since: can't shoot it well, as not used to it; Erichsen sick to-day ; everything and everybody cold and miserable; hauled out on floe; strong wind from SSE. abeam; saw low land abeam, but no one would admit it was land; called it open w^ater. 20 to 29. Camped on floe within sight of low land to S. and W.; captain said we were to N. of New Siberia ; but on 28th land sighted to southeast, and we found we were N. of Thaddeus Island instead, and drifting through the channel between the two islands; this shows our position, by observations, to be 70 to 80 miles out ; daring our 9 days in camp I shot three seals, got one ; Dunbar 2 ; Nindemann 1 ; Bartlett 1 ; I made two bad misses. 29/-/t.— After dinner Chipp reported a lead opening to S. ; moved boats over floe piece and got under way about 1 p. ra. ; kept on for a mile or two, when tied up wait- ing for an opening; on Chipp's report of a practicable opening under way again, and kei)fc going until about 8.30, through fair, open ice; camped. 30//(.— Out at 4 a. m. and away at 5; kept on all day ; saw E. point of Thaddeus Island in a. m. and SE. point at noon ; went for it, and landed after much efl:brt by trans- ferring })eople and stuff boat to boat ; camped on bluff; after supper Alexy and I out for reindeer ; found lots of tracks but saw no deer; long tramps over tundras; very tired. 31s^— Left at 7 a. m., coasting to the N.SW.; saw winter huts marked on chart; reached most southerly point Thaddeus Island at 4 p.m.; could not land ; too shoal ; put out for next small island ; water very shoal; scarcely enough to float the first cutter ; spent a miserable night in the shoals, tacking, backing and filling to clear the long, low bank that seemed to go on our starboard side parallel to the course; chilled through and sick from motion of boat ; incident, anchoring with a keg of alcohol and pem- mican cans ; simply awful muddle, tied up at 4 a. m., Sept. 1st, to piece of grounded ice until second cutter came up, had breakfast and brief rest ; then off before fine strong wind to SSW. ; going sometimes six knots; lost second cutter about 3 p. m ; tied up to a floating floe piece at 5 p.m.; had supY)er and camped to wait for second cutter; I don't believe she will turn up until we reach the Lena, as wind is so strong and drift so rapid that she can't find us; the real value of black boats and tanned sails apparent now. 2nd iSep. — Wind blowing gale from S. E. ; still camped ; commanding officer '^ played out." 3rd September. — Camped ; Aneguiu reported second cutter after dinner ; she came to at the floe edge, one mile away, and Chipp, with Kuhne, crossed men to camp to re- port. They got to us at 6 p. m. ; we had ducks for dinner ; excellent. 4//j Sept. — After breakfast hauled boats and stuff to the floe edge in towards land lead ; after dinner got afloat and ran along floe edge until brought up by ice ; ran through heavy sea towards land; finally got ashore on low land of Koltenoi island and camped close to beach ; com. off. got overboard as we started ; in afternoon built big fire and tried to dry our clothes. Fifth day. — Foggy, but calm ; parties went out hunting, but got nothing ; I found hut and made sketches; Alexy found Russian coin, 1840; I found many small things; all brought in; wind changed to N. W. C)ih. — Started along beach ; after a short row in boats, we made about five miles, where we had dinner ; we then hauled out our boats and stuff and carried them about a quarter of a mile, and got within five miles of Sledge island, where we hauled out and camped. 7th. — Up at 5 a. m. ; after, breakfast, and got under way at 6.30 ; cleared island Spt. at 9 and away S. SW. to SW. ; wind freshened and we had to go about on account of ice ; finally got through, and had a strong beam wind, which raised the sea so as to make our overloaded boats take in water at every roll ; run before it a day and night. Sth. — Morning; we hauled under shelter of floe piece a little and then got away; everybody wet and miserable ; worked along through ice and smoother water all day until 4 p.m., when we hauled otit and camped on a floe-piece, very tired and ex- hausted. 9th. — Sea nearly calm all day; saw Stolbar Island E. SE., way and under oars made fairway; I raised the Sumiuawoki Island about 3 p. m.; started for it and nearly reached it when fog *' shut" in and we had to camp on a floe piece about one mile from beach. Regular hitch business; yonng ice making. lOth. — Under way ; rounded north end of island and came along west side ; landed for dinner, found tracks of deer ; after dinner hunting party followed deer tracks; they^ot one doe ; missed a fawn; then hauled in and commenced to dress and cook JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 181 meat; for extra dinner and supper; some grumbling among men at delay on this island, as we have a fair wind and open sea, and are only 96 miles from Barkin. This is our 90th day from the ship, and for the sake of a feed of meat we are delaying or losing two good days. VMJi, Sunday. — Camped on south end of island; parties sent out hunting but noth- ing got except a few ptarmigan. I'Slh, Monday. — Started at 7.30 a. m. and by 9 a. m. were at end of second island. Fair but brisk wind. Went along well together until noon when stopping for dinner by an ice floe. After dinner went on. W. boat stove by running on floe during the difficult navigation of the floating ice. Hauled her out and repaired her temporarily. Patch and grease. Went on, wind freshening to very strong. Sea very rough and threatening at about 3; W. boat run ahead and we lost sight of her. Second cutter astern and out of sight at about 4 p. m. From that forward we saw neither of these boats. About the time the second cutter disappeared the sea was running mountains, and we shipped one sea which nearly swamped us, filling our boat to the thwarts; bailed her and had her hardly clear when she gibed and nearly capsized, breaking mast step and disabling her. Then the C. O. had the alcohol keg hove over as a sea anchor; then the oars, the sail and yard, and an old sail or sled cover tied bagwise. The boat would not come up and ride to it, but lay in the trough of the sea all night and most of next day. I never experienced anything and hope never to know of a similar case of utter misery. Wet by every sea, trembling with cold, hopeless excej^t in the mercy of Almighty God, we sat, jammed together, for nearly 72 hours. I make no attempt to describe what we experienced. Fortunately, the surgeon served out small doses of brandy during Ist 36 hours, and that helped to warm us for a little while; bailing continually. All the hair fairly washed off my parky as I sat under every sea that came over. Finally, through the mercy of God, the sea and wind mod- erated, and though wet, we had a respite from the utter misery of the storm. Baf- fling winds now kept us afloat, so that when we sighted the low coast of the Lena Delta we were five nights and six days in the boat, cold and wet. Even now a new trial of endurance bad to be met. The water on the coast was so shallow that the boat could not come within one and a half miles of land. We therefore lay all Friday and most of Saturday, the 17th and 18th, aground by a piece of shingle ice ; and in the afternoon all hands, except the commanding officer, surgeon, Boyd, and Erichsen had to go overboard and walk the boat towards the land. We got within a mile when she grounded again, and we had to back our sleeping gear ashore in a snow storm. Subsequently the rest of the men made several trips back to boat, and C. O., surgeon, and two sick men had to foot it ashore. I remained with cook, who was very sick. My own feet were almost frozen, the big toe of right foot being black and blue and feelingless. Got a big fire going and dried out somewhat. Boyd and Erichsen's feet in an awful condition. Go's hands bandaged up ; all broken out. Cook almost useless. Sunday, 19th. — Remained in camp. M«n brought in everything from boat and she was abandoned. Alexy shot a gull, which made soup for 14 of us. When fortified with a little pemican grease it was excellent. Made a fire near camp, as we had plenty of driftwood, and dried out clothes. Everything on me was saturated. Monday, Idtli. — Left camp about 1 p. m., after abandoning everything but two tents, 1 stove, i blanket for each man, some rubber bottles of alcohol, and a lot of truck, log- books, &c., &c., which weighted down the men beyond their strength. We wore not long under way when we came to water which gave us all wet feet. Camped about 6 p. m,, about S. SW. of landing-place. Turned in and slept [?] 7 in a tent, so misera- bly that I would rather be out in the open air. The ground was saturated with water. Tuesday, 20th. — Started from camp and made slow way, as Erichsen was completely broken down, and lay on the ground saying he would die, but could not go on. Co. and surgeon went back and boosted him along. Deer tracks seen by all hands. After dinner Alexy and Nindemann went after a small herd, but could not get up with them. Later, and before supper, Alexy, Nindemann, and myself went out after the deer, but could only find fresh tracks leading about S. W. We abandoned the No. 1 tent at last evening's camp, so had to cut No. 6 in two and sleep [?] on hurdles with a wind-guard [?] of a log at our heads and the half tent as a coverlid. The results were awful. The cold was horrible, and the jam worse. A more miserable night it would be difficult to experience, and could not be out of the place we were in. We had a big fire, plenty of wood, but the general plan of running the machine that has been our bane so long, still holds like a horse-leech and sucks our chances of escape away. Wednesday, 31si. — Up and away about 7.30 a. m., and made very good way until din- ner, which we had in a blinding snow squall by the bank of a river, which is an out- fall of the Lena. The sick are getting along very well. After dinner, followed river bank left southward until we reached two huts on low bluft'. One of the seappears to be quite new ; the other perhaps a few years old ; wooden skeleton covered with sods. We camped in these. Alexy started out to examine some huts he saw. He remained 182 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. away late, and got back as we turned in. Leg of deer and two tongues. He killed two, and we all turned out and ate voraciously of the meat. Slept rather cold. Thursday, 22nd. — A party of men under Nindemann went out and brought in the deer meat. We had soup for supper ; very good. I remained in hut all day. The fresh meat caused looseness of bowels. Sick men improving by rest, but all hands complain of feet. Fiiday, 23rd. — Remained in hut all day; weather clear and fiue ; no hunting. Sick better. Had regular and good allowance of meat^ with soup twice. Made sketches of scenes on route for Com. C. O. Repaired pants. Getting ready for a start to-mor- row. Gortz made a pair of blanket mittens for me on Thursday ; very warm and good. Greased my feet, which relieved them considerably. Saturday, 24th. — Up at daybreak, and had soup and boiled meat. We are leaving nothing eatable behind us. Started early and walked all day, making fair progress, considering the condition of the party. Had our rations of deer meat. Camped at night on logs under shelter of half tents. Miserably cold and uncomfortable. Sunday, 2bth. — Turned out very much chilled. After breakfast went ahead, and at dinner eat our last ration of meat. Prayers. Good-bye fire. On again, and arrived, by God's mercy, at evening at a large enough hut to hold the party. Remained there for night. Monday, 26th. — Made a raft in morning, and crossed arm of river in small parties. Much delay. Nindemann put under arrest for grumbling to himself. He is to be tried by court-martial, &c., &c. Had dinner on right bank, under bluff". Went on and camped again under blulf. Made a better rig for shelter by tricing up the tents as a lee, and lying around the fire. Tuesday, 27th. — Alexy shot a big buck, Deo gratias. Meat hauled in. We had eaten our second last ration of peramican. We turned to and eat about three pounds apiece of deer meat with tea, finishing about noon; then uji, and each man taking a load of meat, in addition to his old load, went ahead until night, when we camped down un- der the bluff, making a fair shelter. Wednesday, 28th. — Up at daybreak, and after a long and painful march reached an old hut on the point, between main river and arm leading southeast of thereabouts. We camped in hut and repaired it somewhat. Collected wood, and a big fire built on point to attract attention of the natives. Closely packed and uncomfortable from cold. Thursday, 29th. — Doctor, self, Nindemann, and Alexy off hunting. Nothing seen but a few x^tarmigans. Alexy shot a gull ; soup of him for fourteen of us. No wood for a raft near us. Small two-man hut up Second River, which was probably made in August. Fish-bait in traps nearly fresh ; piece roasted and eaten. Alexy and Ninde- mann fixed up a fish-line and baited hooks with bird gut, but up to turning-in time no bite. Our allowance of meat, one-half pound a meal, and it is not filling. A sense of void jiossesses one all the time with haunting memories of former feeds. Visions of plenty cross the mental sight and produce a painful reaction on the gas- tronomical department. Turned in, close packed, and passed a cold and miserable night. Friday, 30th. — Up to a meager breakfast. Erichsen's toes cut off from both feet. This is very sad, as it cripples a big, able man, and puts an end to his calling as a seaman. I hope the good and merciful God, who has preserved us so long, will bring us all out of this peril, and incline us to testify to His mercies before all men. Alexy and Nindemann out hunting ; other hands hauling wood. River inclined to freeze over and give us a bridge. Q. I wish to ask you a hypothetical question which the committee yesterday said could be put. If you had a guest at your house and you asked that guest not to be so intimate with your servants, and the guest should repeat that remark to the servants, would you not consider that it was an improper act ■? — A. Well, that is so peculiar a question that I really do not know how to answer it ; it would all depend on what my re- lations were with the guest. Q. You being the host, having a guest? — A. I should look entirely upon what the guest had to do with them. It would depend on the na- ture of my relations with the guest and the character of the servants. Q. You would not consider that that was tattling ? — A. No, sir. Mr. Arnoux. In connection with the other letter, I would like to read the letters of introduction which Captain De Long gave to Mr. Collins, which caused him to visit these gentlemen in Washington and make this report. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 183 Mr. Curtis. Certainly ; I have no objection to that. Mr. Arnoux (reading) : No. 150 West Eleventh Street, New York, March 29, 1879. Mr. Curtis (interposing). What book are you reading from ? Mr. Arnoux. From the press-copy book. Mr. Curtis. Whose ? Mr. Arnoux. They are press copies of Captain De Long's letters de- livered to Mr. Collins, and which Collins in turn delivered to these gen- tlemen in Washington as letters of introduction, and upon which he wrote the letter which has been read and which pleased Judge Curtis so much. Mr. McAdoo. Were these press copies made at the time ? Mr. Arnoux. Yes, sir. Mr. Curtis. It is in no sense legal evidence, but I will not object to it. Mr. Arnoux (reading) : No. 150 West Eleventh Street, New Yoi% March 29, 1879. Professor S. F. Baird, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C. : Sir : Permit me to introduce to you Mr. Jerome J. Colling, of the New York Herald, ■wlio is to accompany the Arctic expedition under my command as our meteorologist. May I ask for him the courtesies of the Smithsonian and the favor of your personal advice and suggestions in anything which you deem good for the success of the ex- pedition. Very respectfully, GEORGE W. DE LONG, Lieutenant Commanding Arctic Str. Jeannette. Mr. Curtis. We offer that also. Mr. BouTELLE. We will consider it in. - Mr. Arnoux (reading) : Ne. 150 West Eleventh Street, New Yorlc, March 29, 1879. My Dear Tom : Let me make Mr. Jerome J. Collins, of the New York Herald, ac- quainted with you. He is going with me as our meteorologist, &c., and proceeds to Washington to book up and practice at the Smithsonian and the Observatory. I have introduced him to Admiral Eodgers, Professor Baird, Captain Franklin, Professor Harkness, and Dr. Bessels. Help him along in any way you can, and charge it to ac- count of gratitude. Faithfully yours, GEORGE W. DE LONG. Lieut. Thos. Perry, U. S. N., Naval Observatory, Washington, D. C. Mr. Curtis. We offer that also. Mr. Arnoux (reading) : No. 150 West Eleventh Street, New York, March 31, 1879. My Dear Sir : Under date of March 28, Captain Patterson, Superintendent Coast Survey, informs me that he will spare us — 3 hydrometers, 1 6-iuch transit, 1 reflecting circle. Will you please look at these instruments, and if they need no repairs have them boxed up and retain them in your possession until further orders. "A bird in the hand," &,c. There were a number of portable transit theodolites, with altitude and azimuth circles, in the Coast Survey instrument room, of which a few might be ob- tained by delicate management. Lieut. H. E.Nichols, of the Coast Survey office, is a 184 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. frieud of mine, and will aid you if you mention the subject to liim from me. These theodolites read to one minute of arc, and will come in handily in sledge traveling. Let me coumiend to you the advantage of jogging Dr. Bessels' memory on the sub- ject of a loan from the Smithsonian Institution. I should like you to return me the list of instruments, in Dr. Bessels' handwriting, retaining a copy for your own information. Respectfully, GEORGE W. DG LONG. Mr. J. J. Collins, Washington, D. C. Mr. Curtis. We offer that also. Mr. Arnoux. I read a telegram sent by the Western Union Telegraph Company, dated Kew York, July, 1879. Received at San Francisco 4th, 1879 : Capt. G. W. De Long, Arctic Steamer Jeamiette : Mr. Bennett has cabled the following to be forwarded to you: B. C. Jenkins, F. R. A. S., writes me as follows : Is it possible for your expedition, passing through Bering Strait, to sail east and lix position magnetic pole, which unvisited since Ross discov- ered in Boothia, 1830. Have good reason believe magnetic ])o\e travels round pole of earth in about five hundred years, and since 1830 has traveled from Boothia to Prince Albert Land, to latitude 72° 15', longitude 114° 45'. Proof of this statement appears in March number transactions Royal Academy, Dr. Linci, of Rome, and been ap- proved by commission appointed by Royal Academy Sciences, Brussels. To examine question by practical demonstration is, however, essential. Possibly your expedition might easily accomplish it. Great importance of matter may be inferred from fact all magnetic lines on charts are approximated now to point in Boothia, 1,200 miles away from place where pole is now. These lines are consequently misleading for northern regions. BENNETT. Mr. Mc Adoo. Was that published as one of the exhibits at theformer inquiry ? Mr. Arnoux. No, sir ; I think not. I read a telegram dated New York, 5, 22, 1879, received at Burlington, Iowa, 1.50 p. m., and to Capt. George De Long, care General S. L. Glasgow; The following cable I received from Mr. Bennett this morning : '* Conner Y, '^New York: '' Cannot yet understand from your cable who Mudge is. "Was willing make great exception, Longfellow being old personal friend, but cannot consent any other lay- man going on expedition. Impress this fact upon Do Long. Tell De Long have ut- most conlidence his success. Wish him cable me list officers, and scientists selected so I may reserve right to any individual selected by him or Government. Regret ex- ceedingly I cannot bo there to bid him God speed, but hope to bo on hand to con- gratulate him upon successful return. Tell him I have greatest confidence in his energy and pluck and I thank him sincerely for his fidelity to me. Say also, he may push forward to north next spring with perfect confideuce, for if icebound I shall spare neither money nor influence to follow him up and send assistance next year so neither he nor his men will be in danger. Wish this to be an American success, not another Nares affair. Tell him in case he returns next year unsuccessfnl, which I don't believe possible, I shall most certainly send another expedition on following year, and continue doing so until successful, but had rather victory should be his than anothers. Should Do Long not return next year, or in fact never, the widows of men belonging to expedition will be protected by me. Should like him tell thisto his men upon their departure. "BENNETT." Please acknowledge receipt of this immediately. CONNERY. Mr. Curtis. We offer that also. Mr. Arnoux. Now, I read a letter from Captain De Long to Mr. Ben- nett, which I believe relates to that. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 185 [Arctic steamer Jeannette at sea, latitude 49° 24' N,, longitude 152° 37' W.] July 25, 1879. My Dear Bennett : At the first general muster of the officers aud men of this vessel, held after the ship was placed in commission and turned over to my command, I acquainted them with 80 much of your cablegram to me of the 22d May, as relating to your sending a vessel north next year, and extending your protection to the widows of any of them who might lose their lives while engaged in the work of this expedition. I am requested hy them to return you their sincere thanks for your generous thought- fulness and to express to you their assurance that the recollection of it will nerve them to increased efforts in trying moments to make the expedition what you and they so much desire — a success. Faithfully yours, GEORGE W. DE LONG, Lieut. Commander. Q. (Exhibiting to witness letter dated April 18tli — no year.) Is that your iDrotlier's handwriting*? — A. To the best of my knowledge it is. Mr. Arnoux (reading) : Herald Office, April 18. My Dear Captain : I suspect you think I am in Washington carrying out your in- structions about the pendulum. I could not leave the city, and have been spending spare hours working up in photograph^^^. I will get away to-morrow or Sunday night at latest, and put things in shape at once. I will see Professor Baird, Dr. Bessels, Fauth & Co., &c., without delay. I will call at Green's to-morrow and find out if he can make the thermometer frame (spectrum) with black bulbs in vacua, covered by colored receivers. This plan will give the best results. Bessels does not think much of the idea, but he shrugs his shoulders at so many things that I am inclined to make the experiments anyhow. The " Smithsonian's contributions to knowledge," sent by Professor Bail d, contain all information about the pendulum and other experiments we need. We must have a portable dark room for field photography. It will be very port- able and not bigger than a good hand-satchel.- If I don't see you at the office to- morrow (Saturday), write me anything you have to say at Washington. Truly yours, JEROME J. COLLINS. Capt. G. W. De Long, U. S. N. Mr. OuETis. We offer that also. Mr. Arnoux. I would like right here to read, although I have not the proof of it — there is no doubt of it — a letter from the Coast Sur- vey office in regard to the instruments (reading) : United States Coast and Geodetic Survey Office, Washinglon, April 22, 1879. Dear Sir : I regret very much to have missed your call. In regard to your req uest for additional instruments I can only say that those which have been supplied have been so transferred from the Coast Survey service by direction of the superintendent, C. P. Patterson, and that it is not within my power to go beyond his instructions in the premises. Very respectfully, J. E. HILGARDE, Assistant in charge of office. Lieut. George W. De Long, U. S. N., Ebhitt House, Washington, D C. Another letter (reading) : United States Coast and Geodetic Survey Office, B^ashington, April 8, 1879. Dear Sir : By to-day's express I forward to your address, care of New York Herald office. New York, two (2) boxes containing — One transit theodolite with stand. One reflecting circle. 186 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Four specimen water bottles. Six hydrometers with two cups. Please acknowledge receipt. Very respectfully, J. E. HILGARDE, Assistant in charge. Lieut. George W. De Long, U. S. N., 150 West nth street, New York City. Mr. James Green, 20 Vv . Fourth street. New York, has been instructed to deliver to you seven deep-sea thermometers which are in his keeping, taking your receipt for the same as you have already been informed in office letter of the 4th inst. G. Q. (Submitting a paper.) I also show you a letter dated May 15, 1879, aud ask you if this letter and signature are not in the handwrit- ing of your brother '? — A. To the best of my belief it is. I won't be so positive about that signature. It is not his ordinary one. Mr. AitNOUX (reading) : May 15, 1879. Dear Captain: Mr. Twombly says he will look over the list and see what second- hand instruments he can find and which he is willing to sell very cheap. As to cups, wire, carbons, and other matters required for telegraphy, he suggests that we buy them. I don't think you will get anything for nothing from the Western Union Com- pany. They take little interest in our outfit. Mr. Connery will let us have a com- plete set of Wheatstone friction telegraph instruments formerly used in the office. They are admirably adapted to working short lines and need no battery. Of course the sending of a message will necessarily be slow, but as friend Neville says, ''time is no object." If you have time look at them in the library. Get some of the boys in the city department, a stenographer, to take notes of what you want me to do after you leave. It will save time. He can give me a copy which I will read and ask any special instructions before yon go. Yours, COLLINS. Mr. Twombly will give an answer on Monday next. Mr. Curtis. We offer that also Mr. Arnoux. Right in that coi of Captain De Long's in regard to some instruments [reading] : Mr. Arnoux. Right in that connection I would like to read a letter No. 150 West Eleventh Street, New York, March 20, 1879. Hon. I. I. Hayes, Albany, N. Y. : My Dear Sir : Among the instruments which I desire to use in the Arctic expedi- tion may be named a gravity pendulum. I am unable to find anybody in New York who has made one, but I am informed that you have had one made somewhere, and that you may possibly have it yet in your possession. Will you please give me some information on this subject and permit me to borrow your pendulum long enough to serve as a model for instrument makers. Very respectfully^ GEORGE W. DE LONG. Lieut. U. S. N. By Mr. CURTiS: Q. Now, Mr. Arnoux questioned you in reference to a conversation you had with Mr. Newcomb in New York. How soon after the return of the survivors of the expedition did you see Professor Newcomb in New York ? — A. I met Mr. Newcomb in New York for the first time, I think, last February. Q. What was the conversation that you had with Professor Newcomb JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 1 87 in reference to the Jeannette expedition, its management or tlie treat- ment of its crew, or any of the persons connected with the expedition? — A. I had several general conversations with Mr. ^N'ewcomb. Q. Well, the first conversation? — A. I cannot positively recollect everything that transpired. Q. Give us the substance of what you remember; I do not care for the exact words. — A. Mr. Newcomb told me that himself and my brother had been outrageously treated on the Jeannette. Q. Did he tell you anything that your brother had said to him in re- gard to that treatment? — A. He told me about his being arrested and deprived of the use of his instruments. By Mr. Boutelle: Q. Did he say he was arrested? — A. Arrested, I think was the word used to the best of my recollection. Of course this conversation I can only give to the best of my recollection. He stated that he was de- prived of his instruments and allowed to do no work for eighteen months, I think ', also that he was treated very badly, outrageously ; that he had made an elaborate collection of dried specimens there, and had them on the deck, and the captain came along one day and had them thrown overboard, after his spending a great deal of care and labor on the specimens. By Mr. Curtis : Q. Professor Newcomb was attached to the expedition also in a scien- tific capacity, as you understood ? Mr. Arnoux. i object to his testifying to that j certainly that would not be competent even as hearsay, for he says he knew nothing of the matter. The Chairman. The ground that this is put on is that these were all persons attached to the expedition, and it is the conduct of those per- sons that is under investigation now. By Mr. Curtis : Q. What other conversations did you have, if any, with Professor Newcomb ? — A. He stated to me that he was put under arrest, and that other men on the expedition were put under arrest for trivial causes. Q. That other men were put under arrest for trivial causes ? — A. Yes. Q. Well, anything else ? — A. That Mr. Melville at one time put a shot- gun to his head and told him, God damn him, that he had killed lots of better men than him often. Q. I did not understand you; please repeat that. — A. As I remember it, that Mr. IsTewcomb said Mr. Melville put a gun to his head, and says he, '' You little God damned Yankee son of a bitch, I could kill," or " would kill, lots of better men than you." Q. He referred to him as a native of ]N"ew England, then ?— A. I should judge so. Q. Is that all that was offensive that was said ? — A. l^o, sir ; he also related to me the fact that Captain De Long called him into his room one day and asked him why he did not talk on the expedition, and he said that was a personal matter for himself. Q. Why he did not do what ? — A. Why he kept silent, and he said that was a personal matter for himself, and he would talk when he liked and he Would not when he liked ; and said he (I think he used these words), " Damn jou,ril make you talk, if you don't." 188 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. By Mr. Boutelle: Q. What did you understand him to mean by talk 1 — A. He meant keeping sileut on the ship and not holding general conversation. Mr. Newcomb can explain that better than I can. I am only giving the con- versation as well as I can. Mr. Newcomb asked him, " Captain, don't I do my duty on this ship ?" and the captain said, "Yes 5 I take God damned good care that yon do." By Mr. Curtis : Q. Was there anything else said of an offensive character, not to be repeated in the presence of ladies? — A. No. There were hundreds of things said that I do not recollect. In fact, I prefer Mr. Newcomb to state what he knows. Q. (Submitting a paper to witness.) What is that letter? — A. It is a letter addressed to my brother and found among his papers, signed J. G. Bennett. Q. Eead it. — A. (Beading :) Hotel Bristol, Paris, January ISth, 1879. Dear Mr. Collins : Please seud me a memorandum of the instruments and equipment necessary for your observations during the Arctic expedition and let me know as fully as possible what system you proi>ose to follow, together with any suggestions you have to make about the meteorological or other branches of the scientific service of the expedition. Who do you think would be a good man to select from the Smithsonian Institute as generally useful and particularly in the departments of geology and mineralogy ? Write me fully, and make any suggestions that occur to you. Truly vours, J. G. BENNETT. P. S. — I would also like to have you make some inquiries about the feasibility of balloons, not for making ascents, but to assist in lifting and dragging sledges when the wind is favorable, Q. Judge Arnoux seems to be exercised somewhat about the word " instruction" in a letter of introduction by Captain De Long to some official in Washington. Although it was not a term employed by your brother, you see nothing in any of those letters that militates in your judgment against his capacity at all, do you ? — A. No, sir. Q. There are none of us too old to learn, are we ? — A. Not to my knowl- edge. Q. Neither physician, lawyer, nor warrior. It in your judgment does not detract from a man's merit and capacity that he is modest, that he seeks to learn, does it 1 — A. No. Q. (Submitting a paper.) What is that card ? — A. That is the mem- bership card of the French Society for the Advancement of Science. Mr. Curtis. I will offer that. The front side of the card is as follows. Association Franfaise pour I'Avancement des Sciences, 7e Session, Paris. Aoftt 1878. Mr. Jerome Collins, Membre Etranger. Signature du Titulaire. H. Signature du President. E. Henry. Stamped : ^'Association Fran^aise, 7^ Session, 1878. - Paris.*' JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 189 On the fourth page is the following : "CONGRES DE PARIS. A leur arriv(5e h Paris MM. les membres de 1' Association Frangaise sont pries de passer au Secretariat General afin d'y dounor lenr adresse et d'y faire coD,tr61er la prdsente carte qui ne sera valable qu'apres I'apposition du timbre de 1' Association. Timbre de l'Association. Stamj) of tlie Association. On the two interior pages is spread a map of the city of Paris. Q. Yon were requested yesterday to remember what you had stated in your memorial or petition relative to what w^as told to Mr. Melville on the 3d day of October. Do you know what I refer to? — A. I believe you refer to my statement that Bartlett informed me that he proposed to go to Bulun or look for De Long on the 3d of October. Q. That is it exactly. What have you to say on that subject, if any- thing! — A. I simply state, to the best of my knowledge and belief, Mr. Bartlett did make that statement to me. Q. And it was in the belief and recollection on your part that he did make that statement that you incorporated it into the petition or memorial ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. I think you have gone very fully into the matter of your motives and sentiments in this investigation. You never from the start have entertained any sentiment or feeling of a vindictive character against anybody, have you ? — A. No, sir; I have not. Q. Your sole object has been to seek after and to discover the truth in regard to this expedition ! — A. That is the fact. Q. However, the search might result to any person or persons ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And you believed at the time, as the correspondence to-day de- velops, that when Captain De Long and your brother departed on that unfortunate journey they were friends'? — A. Yes; to the best of my knowledge and belief. Q. And certainly up to that time neither your brother nor j^ourself could have had any feeling on this subject? — A. No, sir; my brother was most emphatic in stating that he did not believe in the truth of the Washington Post interview. Q. In fact the confidence of your brother in De Long survived the most positive evidence of the truth of that interview, did it !— A. Yes, sir. 190 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. By the Chairman : Q. I have a question or two to ask you relative to the conversation between you and Mr. Lemly. I understood you to say that Mr. Lemly said he would object to such questions as reflected upon the dead ? — A. Yes, sir 5 that was my statement. Q. You are sure he said that? — A. Absolutely. Q. I understood you to say that he advised you to employ counsel? — A. He suggested it, and said he thought it would be a good thing to have counsel, in the last interview I had with him at the Eiggs House. Q. Now, I will ask you if what he said relative to the questions pro- pounded by you was not to this effect: That he would put the questions, but that he would object to such questions as depended merely on hear- say, and leave it to the court to determine the admissibility of those questions? — A. He never made any such statement to me. To my knowledge and recollection he stated to me that he would object to questions being admitted that reflected on the dead, and that he reserved the right to object to any questions that he did not consider proper; that, while he would ask some of the questions, he would immediately after object to their being answered. Q. Those that were hearsay ? — A. I had no conversation with him that I remember about hearsay testimony. Q. That he would object to all answers where the witness did not speak from his knowledge ! — A. He did not use those words to me in rela- tion to it. He stated that he should reserve to himself the right to ob- ject to any questions immediately after asking them, as judge-advocate of the court. Mr. Lemly was very frank in the matter. Q. Then you saj^ he did not confine himself to reserving the right to object to questions on the ground that the answers would be hearsay ? — A. No, sir ; he reserved the right to object to any question that he saw fit immediately after asking it. He said in his capacity as judge-advo- cate he would ask the question and then immediately after object to its being answered. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. What kind of questions would he object to ? — A. He did not specify. Q. Yes J he was referring to some kind of questions he would object to ? — A. Any questions reflecting upon any one who was dead. By Mr. McAdoo : Q. Was any one present at the interview between you and Mr. Lemly ? — A. No, sir ; I met Mr. Lemly at the Biggs House after the first meeting, as well as I recollect. By the Chairman : Q. You have read this record, have you not ? The Witness. Which record ? Q. The record of the Board of Inquiry. — A. Oh, yes, I have gone over it. Q. Have you not seen that questions were asked which might have elicited matter derogatory to the dead ? — A. I could not state just at this moment. Q. If answered one way that they might elicit matter derogatory to the dead ? — A. I could not possibly say at present. Q. Then you sa}^ that the only reservation was not that the witness would be required to Si)eak from his own knowledge? — A. I have no JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. 191 recollection of any such statement on tlie part of Mr. Lemly. I have stated it as fully as I can recall it. Q. Did he advise you not to appear before the Court of Inquiry?— A. Yes, until sent for — unless sent for. I am most positive in that assertion. It was at the Eiggs House. Q. Were you not informed by letter a-s well as in person that every facility would be given to you for presenting to the court such facts as you desired ? — A. Mr. Lemly's letters are in the hands of the committee; all that I have received in the matter. Q. Did you get a letter from himi— A. I turned them all over. Mr. Lemly was very kind in the matter, and requested me to meet him in Washington. Q. And he offered to present such questions of fact pertaining to the investigation as you might possess? — A. I do not recollect his making the assertion as to facts, and there is no such statement in any of his letters. Q. Did you write a letter to Mr. Lemly in which you expressed your- self as satisfied with the course which he pursued 1 — A. I wrote a letter to Mr. Lemly in which I stated that I felt perfectly satisfied that any question that the court would admit, and that he would not object to, would be asked by him. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. That was prior to the meeting of the Board of Inquiry ? — A. That was during the session of the Board of Inquiry. I think I have an answer to that letter. Q. That was an expression of confidence as to what he would do rather than an exi^ression of satisfaction at what he had done ? — A. Yes, sir ; I stated that I felt perfectly satisfied that any question he would not object to, and that the court was disposed to admit^ would be asked by him as well as if asked by counsel. By the Chairman: Q. You did not write a letter to him stating that you were satisfied with the course which he was pursuing during the progress of the in- quiry ? — A. There is but one letter in relation to that matter, and I think I have a copy of it here. It was in relation to some statements that I think appeared in the paper, and I said that I was perfectly satisfied that any question that he would not object to and the court felt disposed to admit would be asked by him, and I think that my belief was right in the matter; every question that I submitted to him that he did not object to or the court did not object to was admitted as a fact, and I had no reason to object to Mr. Lemly's course in the matter, other than he objected to questions that I believed the court should have admitted. By Mr. Boutelle : Q. That opinion you formed afterwards? — A. That was the opinion I formed after my return from Washington ; I wrote the letter from Minneapolis, Minn. Q. When you wrote him that letter stating that you were satisfied that his course in regard to the questions and the course of the court would be satisfactory, was that letter based upon the conversation that you had had with him in which he told you the course that he was in- tended to pursue? — A. I did not write him any letter in which I stated that the action of the court, or his action, was perfectly satisfactory to me altogether. Q. You do not quite understand me; you say that you wrote him a 192 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. letter in wMch you said you felt perfectly satisfied that his course and that of the court m regard to these questions would be satisfactory and proper? The Witness. That his action and the action of the court would be satisfactory f The Chairman. Yes. A. No sir ; I never made such a statement. Q. Let me hear again just what you did say you wrote him ? — A. I wrote him stating that I felt perfectly assured that any questions that the court would admit, or that he would not object to, could be just as well asked by him, and that he would ask these questions as well as counsel. By Mr. McAdoo : Q. That was in answer to the suggestion that you should employ pri- vate counsel ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. In that conversation which you had with Lieutenant Danenhower, in which you say he said that your brother had a life of hell, or words to that effect (I forget the exact language), are you sure that was the expression, instead of an expression like this : That life had been hell in the Arctic regions for three years ; that is, your brother's life, intend- ing to convey the impression that the lives of all of them had been hell in the Arctic by reason of their sufferings ?— A. The impression con- veyed to my mind, and it clearly was what Mr. Danenhower meant to convey to my mind, was that my brother's life had been a perfect hell in the Arctic — his individual life. By Mr. Curtis : Q. You have copies of two letters that you wrote and addressed to Lieutenant Lemly ; will you be kind enough to read them? — A. (Eead- •ing:) Minneapolis, Minn., December 16, 1»82. Sir: Some two weeks ago I wrote joxi in refereuce to procuring a list of the ques" tions handed you, also a request for the action of the Court of Inquiry in reference thereto. I have not had the honor of as yet receiving a reply. From the accounts published in the Critic I find that several of the questions sub- mitted by me to you were not asked witnesses, but of course this may be an omission of full publication on the part of j^ublishers of the paper. I see by the papers that Colonel Gilder, special correspondent of the New York Herald, has arrived. As he traveled all over the Cape Bykotf and Geeomovialocke district, one month after Mr. Melville, I think he would be able to give valuable information in relation to the country, distances, difficulties of travel, and the possibility of rescue of De Long and his men. I would therefore request that Colonel Gilder be called before the Board. It having come to my knowledge that certain parties were anxious to examine the papers and memoranda found on my brother's body, I have to request that all appli- cations for such purpose be refused unless the parties have written permission from either my brother, Mr. B. A. Collins, or myself, to do so. I am, sir, very respectfully, yours, D. F. COLLINS, M. D. To Master C. M. Lemly, W. S. W., Judge-Advocate, Jeannette Court of Inquiry, Washington, D. C. Q. Read all the letters to Lemly. — A. (Reading :) Minneapolis, Minn., November 25, 1882. Master C. M. Lemly, U. S. N., Judge-Advocate, Jeannette Court Inquiry, Washington, D. C. : Dear Sir: I would feel much obliged if I could get an official record of questions handed to yon, also the list of questions objected to or ruled out by the court. I have also instructed by tchigrani, a friend in Washington, Mr. Frank Hessler, to copy letter found on my brother's body in reference to trouble with De Long. I would take it as a favor if such person be given full and free access to all papers left by my brother. I am, dear sir, respectfully yours. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 193 Minneapolis, Minn., November 38, 1882. Master C. M. Lemly, U. S. N., Judge-Advocate, ^c. : Dear Sir : Your letter 24tb, I received to-day. We are perfectly satisfied to let our case rest in your hands, feeling assured tliat any questions that would be admitted will be asked by you. The paragraph in the Critic, I knew nothing about, andit is only one of the thousand absurd statements that have been made during this in- quiry. I would feel much obliged if I could procure exact copies of all memoranda found on my brother's body. I have Avritten to my brother in New York, and have asked him if there were any other questions he desired sent to you. As yet I have received no answer. I am dear sir, yours, very respectfully, D. F. COLLINS, M. D. Minneapolis, Minn., December 5, 1882. Dear Sir: I would feel obliged if you would furnish me a complete list of all the questions submitted by me to you for presentation to the Court of Inquiry. I have a copy, but desire an official one. I have carefully examined the evidence, so far given by Nindemann, but have failed to find any of the questions to be- asked by you. I would be glad, in Nindemann's case, to get an official copy of the questions asked and the answers, as well as the objections, if any, that may be made to any of the same. I am, dear sir, very respectfully, yours, D. F. COLLINS, M. D. Master C. M. Lemly, U. S. N., Judge-Advocate, Jeannette Court Inquiry, Washington, D. C. Minneapolis, Minn., ^prii 1, 1883. Master C. M. Lemly, U. S. N., Judge- Advocate, Jeannette Court Inquiry, Washington, D. C. : Dear Sir : I inclose a list of questions to be asked Mr. Bartlett in his examination before the court relative to matters connected with the Arctic expedition fitted out by Mr. James Gordon Bennett, of New York. Respectfully, D. F. COLLINS, M. D. By Mr. Arnoux ; Q. Will you turn to page 160? Before the Court of Inquiry this ques-* tiou was put to Mr. Melville, the witness then upon the stand : Question by the Judge-Advocate. Do you know anything further than you have stated of the alleged trouble between Lieutenant Commander De Long and Mr. J. J. ColUns? The Witness. No. Question by the Judge-Advocate. Did De Long ever speak to you about a diffi- culty with him ? That question was objected to and excluded on the ground that it called for hearsay evidence. Did you prepare and send to him that question ? — A. I do not recollect at this time. Q. What is your best recollection ? — A. I am not prepared to state. I might possibly find it among my papers. Q. On page 232 of that record, in the testimony of Mr. IN'oros, it says : Cross-examination by the judge-advocate in behalf of the late Jerome J. Collins. Were those questions which were asked prepared and sent to him by you ? — A. I could not state at this moment whether they were prepared and sent by me or prepared and sent by my brother in New York. Q. It was by one or the other of you ! — A. By one or the other ; yes. Q. Now, on page 236, when Mr. Newcomb was on the stand, it says : Cross-examination by the judge-advocate in behalf of the late Jerome J. Collins Bo you make the same answer in regard to that ? — A. Of course. I do not know what the questions are. 13 J Q* 194 JEANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. Suppose you look at them and say whether they were prepared by either your brother or by yourself? — A. (After referring to record.) Yes ; these questions, I think, were prepared, but I could not think which of us prepared them. Q. I say they were prepared by either your brother or yourself? — A. Yes J to my best recollection. Q. On page 242, in the examination of the witness Tong Sing, the following appears on the record : Cross-examined by the judge-advocate in behalf of the late Jerome J. Collins. Was that question prepared by your brother or yourself? The ques- tion is — What, if anything, do you know of any difficulty between Chief Engineer Mel- ville and Mr. Jerome J. Collins ? A. I have no positive means of identifying these questions ; they must be on file in the Navy Department if we wrote them ; it is not to be presumed that they destroyed the questions. Q. Is it not to be presumed they would be put in the record as on be- half of the late Jerome J. Collins uuless it was cross-examination prepared by either you or your brother, is it ? — A. I am not prepared to answer. Q. You have no recollection whether you asked any questions on that subject or not? — A. I cannot tell what questions I did ask. Q. I ask you have you any recollection whether you prepared and sent to the Judge- Advocate-General any questions to be propounded to Tong Sing? — A. I cannot recollect at the present time; I can easily as- certain by looking over my memorandum book. Q. When Lieutenant Danenhower was a witness on the stand did you or your brother prepare and send to the Judge- Advocate-General questions to be put to him ? — A. I think all the survivors were more or less Q. (Interposing.) Just answer the question. — A. Yes, that is my best impression. Q. Did you or your brother prepare the questions which the Judge- Advocate-General refused to put to the witness Bartlett on the ground that they were hearsay ? — A. I cannot at this moment state absolutely. Q. (Eeading:) Did Mr. Collins speak to you on the matter, and what did he say ? A. That I would not be prepared to swear to. Q. (Reading:) From your conversations with Mr. Collins have you any reason to suppose that Mr. Collins had papers, other than a small note-book, on his person ? A. I think I prepared that question. Q. And the next question also [reading] : Did ho [Mr. Collins] tell you of his having letters addressed to persons in New York ? State all he said. To that the same objection was made.— A. I am not prepared to state. I think that either one of us prepared that question. Q. And the next question, which was excluded [reading] : State as fully as possible the different conversations you had with Mr. Collins rela- tive to his treatment, the loss of his note-book, and all other matters. A. I could not state as to that question, whether I prepared it or my brother prepared it. JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 195 Q. So far as you are aware did the Judge- Advocate-General refuse to put any questions which you wrote except those that he thought objec- tionable on the ground that they called for hearsay evidence ? — A. That I cannot answer, not knowing all the questions. Q. Have you ever examined the record of the court of inquiry, to see what questions were not answered, or not put to the witnesses 1 — A. I have goue over the record several times, and there were quite a large number of questions put. Q. I say that you put, or that were put, to the witnesses, and not al- lowed to be answered ! — A. 1 could not answer without going over it in detail. Q. Did you ever examine the record to see what questions you re- quested to have asked which were not asked ? — A. That I do not re- member. Q. Are you prepared to state now to the committee that there are any questions that you desired to have asked that the Judge- Advocate- General refused to put, on any other ground than that it was hearsay evidence ? — A. That I am not prepared to answer. Mr. Curtis. It was proposed by us to call Lieutenant Danenhower after Dr. Collins, but Professor Newcomb is here from a distance, and he is very anxious to get home to his family, and with the permission of the committee 1 will examine him, so that he may be enabled to do that. The Chairman. Certainly. Eaymond L. Newcomb was here called and examined, without being previously sworn, with the understanding that he was to be sworn sub- sequently by Mr. Cox, the chairman of the committee. By Mr. Curtis : Question. What is your full name? — Answer. Eaymond Lee N^ew- comb. Q. Where do you live ? — A. Salem, Mass. Q. What is your profession ? — A. Naturalist. Q. How long have you been a naturalist! — A. Since 1869. Q. What do you mean by the term naturalist? — A. The term in my judgment may be applied to any one who studies natural history, orni- thology, zoology — the lower orders. Q. Simply studies it? — A. Studies it and investigates. Q. And experiments ? — A. Works it out to the extent of his ability and deriving what information he may have opportunity to derive. Q. Did you know the deceased, Jerome J. Collins? — A. I did. Q. Of course you know the late Captain De Long ? — A. I did. Q. How did you come to be attached to this expedition? — A. Incon- sequence or as the result of a letter written me by Prof. Spencer F. Baird, the 29th of April, I think, was the date, asking me if I would like to consider myself a candidate for the position of naturalist and taxi- dermist on the expedition about to start for the North Pole. Q. Who is Prof. Spencer F. Baird? — A. Superintendent of the Smith- sonian Institution and United States Commissioner of Fish and Fish- eries. Q. What did you reply to that letter ? — A. I do not remember ex- actly, but I replied in the affirmative and stated that I would be glad to go. My words were, part of them, that '' the position would be a stepping stone to honor which was life itself." Q. Have you any information or knowledge of the way and manner 196 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. aod extent of tlie fitting up of the Jeannette? — A. Superficialj not in any official capacity; simply from my powers of observation, common sense applied to looking over the thing. That is all. Q. You term it superficial 1 — A . I do, because I was not, as you might say, a nautical man. Q,. What struck you as superficial in the outfit of the Jeannette? — A. I think you misunderstand me with regard to the word superficial. I do not mean to say that the work was done carelessly. I do not mean to imply that; at least, not yet, any way. What I mean to say is that my views in the premises were next to those of an outsider. I supposed everything was going all right, and had my own bug-hunter duties to look out for, and had my hands full, and I supposed other people had the same. Q. You were to be the naturalist of the expedition. Now what were your duties as such naturalist? — A. Various. Q. Tell them as rapidly as possible. — A. In detail, to look alter the specimens of fauna and flora, botanical, zoological, ethnological — any- thing; that IS what I understand to be the duties of naturalist under such conditions. Q. Had you any specific directions or instructions, either from the Government or Professor Baird? — A. No; being left to myself en- tirely. Q. Your duty, then, was to make such general observations in the in- terest of natural history as were possible, and also to collect whatever specimens might be valuable to natural history? — A. Yes; to obtain whatever I could in the way of natural history. Q. And to that purpose were you furnished with the proper x)ara- phernalia? — A. With a very good one. Q. What did that consist of! — A. Taxidermist implements. Q. Will you be kind enough to explain to us the general popular meaning of that word taxidermist! — A. A person who prepares speci- mens of natural history. Q. Who stuff's them, I suppose! — A. Y^es ; for cabinet museums and collections, and of any kind, whether fish, insects, flesh, fowl, or what not. I had a knife, file, gimlet, pins, i)aper, tape, twine, and all those little incidentals that would be required in this position. Q. Did you have any difiiculty with Mr. Melville!— A. Not while the ship lasted ; not while we had the ship. Q. Did you, at any time during the voyage of the Jeannette or after the voyage ceased by the destruction of the vessel, or at any time du- ring the history of the expedition, have any difficulty with Mr. Melville! — A. We came to words once or twice. Q. Describe the first occasion and state what was said and what was done, giving as particularly as your memory will serve you the words used by you and by him ! — A. The first that I recall was, I think it was, on Thaddeus Island. Q. Where is that ! — A. It is one of the new Siberian group north of Siberia. I think it is the one that we reiiched after leaving Bennett Island. There was a question about serving the food one night at camp and Bartlett treated me in a way I thought was not man-fashion, not as dignilied as it might very easily have been, and I S[)oke to Mel- ville about it and failed to get any redress. Q. What did you say to Melville vibout it!— A. I merely spoke to him saying I thought Bartlett might conduct himself in a little differ- ent manner toward me; that it would be very pleasant to me if he JEANNETTE INQUIRY. 197 would, and that I felt I would be able to do the same towards him. That is the gist of it. Q. What did he reply to that? — A. Then the question came up about rank, and I said I supposed I was an officer — something of that kind. Then, Bartlett being a fireman, and myself, togeiher with Dunbar and Collins, being enlisted as sioaple seamen — nothing more in the premises, although w^e supposed we would be treated as gentlemen — the question of seaman stuck out pretty i)lainly at times. That is the way the mat- ter stood. Q. My dear sir, you see you are not answering my question. When you made this complaint to Melville, you stated the words in which you made it ? — A. The general words. I do not mean to say they were the specific words. Q. Of course, I do not expect you to give the exact words. When you made this complaint to Melville, what did Melville say to you "? — A. I cannot repeat his exact words, but the substance was, he could not do much in the premises, because it was a question which one ranked the other, whether it was Bartlett or I, and that Bartlett was a fireman and I a seaman, and there the matter dropped. Q. In point of fact, although you were the naturalist attached to the expedition, you had been entered upon the books of the ship as a sea- man, in order to couform to a law ot Congress 1 — A. I presume so. Q. In reference to the regulation governing the N^avy, but from the beginning, as understood by you, and as expressly defined when you were taken into the employment of this expedition, you were to dis- charge the duties of a naturalist. Is not that so '? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And that you were not in any way to discharge, or attemi)t to dis- charge, the duties of a seaman '^ — A. Eo, sir. Q. And at the time you were entered as a seaman on the books of the ship, the necessity of so technically entering your name was ex- plained to you ? — A. It was stated to me to be a mere matter of form. Q. And it was not stated to you at the time that your name was en- tered as a seaman on the books of the ship that you would be expected to receive the treatment of a seaman ? — A. No, sir ; if it had been I would have stayed at home. Q. Melville refused on that occasion to give you any satisfaction j was that all that occurred on the occasion of that first interview ? — A. To the best of my recollection, yes. Q. Now, you say that there were one or two occasions; when was the second occasion ? — A. After we reached Lena Delta. Q. By the way, professor, with which party were you ? — A. The Mel- ville party; with Mr. Danenhower and Mr. Melville. Q. Yours was the only party really, with the exception of Noros and Nindeman, that survived ?— A. It was. Q. What was the difficulty there ; please state the origin of it, the circumstances connected with it, and what was said and what was done by both of you ? — A. I should say that he did not like me and tried to spit his spite out in different ways and was rather inclined, as the usual expression is, to sit on me, something of course that one man in rank maj^ easily do to another, and the consequence was that it made me feel unpleasantly, as it would any man. Some orders were givent about fix- ing a rope on the sail of the whale-boat. 1 think Mr. Cole had some- thing to do with the job at the time. I took hold as well as I could and it was very plain to be seen that I was in bad odor with him — that is, to me — and the consequence was, that I was ordered to desist, a.nd then he used profanity to me. 198 JE ANNETTE INQUIRY. Q. What did lie say? — A. He said, '' God damn it, I have seen better men than you are shot for doing less than that." That was the action I took in dropping the rope's end. I said, "You can shoot me, i