Long before the advent of 1910 every trace of the bitter controversy that had so long disturbed American naval circles over the Sampson-Schley quarrel, had fortunately been effaced. The hatchet had been buried, or figuratively speaking, had been thrown overboard, and in 1999 this unhappy feud, which tarnished the prestige of the world's foremost navy, had been obliterated. In 1999, when all heat or vestige of passion had passed away, this unfortunate episode was regarded as being the one and only blot that associated itself with the memory of a wonderful naval exploit, the brilliant engagement on that ever memorable Sunday morning of July 3, 1898, when the Spanish squadron steamed into the jaws of death. Time accomplishes wonders. It tones [The Brave American Officers.] down the angles; it dulls the keenest edge and can even render mild, bitter animosities, which, alas, often sting sharper than serpent fangs. Long before 1900 it was universally acknowledged that gallant Admiral Schley had been persecuted. His tormentors, men of high station, became heartily ashamed of persecuting a brave officer who had committed what apparently, in their judgment, appeared to be the crime of annihilating the Spanish squadron off Santiago. Students of history in 1910 very naturally asked themselves: "If Admiral Schley was so bitterly assailed at the close of a sweeping victory, in what manner would he have been treated by these carping critics had a portion of Cervera's fleet made good its escape?" Admiral Sampson appeared to be willing [Sampson's Unlucky Absence.] and anxious to secure credit for a victory that had been fought and won during his absence. But the question arises, would Admiral Sampson have been willing to shoulder the blame if Cervera's vessels had escaped destruction or would he have saddled Admiral Schley with the responsibility? The reader must form his own conclusions in this matter. On the other hand, all impartial students of history in the twentieth century cheerfully accorded to Admiral Sampson full credit for his gallant services on blockade duty during that war. His responsibilities were great and pressing, and he discharged his duties with utmost fidelity.