Author 
 
 ^^*o^ 
 
 o 
 
 21 
 
 o 
 
 Title 
 
 ^ ** s 
 
 ..J. 
 
 Imprint. 
 
 .M 
 
 18 — 47872-2 •PO 
 
 a 
 
REPRINT OF A LE'n K R 
 
 BY 
 
 Rev. Luke v. McCabe, D. D. 
 
 w 
 
 SHOWING 
 
 The True Cause of the Destruction 
 of the "Maine" 
 
 February 15, 1898 
 
 PHILADELPHIA 
 
 1911 
 MARTIN I. J. GRIFFIN 
 
 PUBLISHER 
 
 1935 N. Eleventh St. 
 
Gifli 
 AUG Ig-,. 
 
/ 
 
 
 PREFATORY NOTE. 
 
 OvERHRooK, June 28, I'^II. 
 Dear Mr. Gkifkin : 
 
 I am pleased to learn from your note that you wish to rcpul)lish my old 
 article on the " Maine,' and willingly comply with your request for a copy. 
 I think it well, however, to prefix a little prefatory note in order to make my 
 view more generally intelligible. 
 
 It should be remembered that the "Maine" was originally designed and 
 built for a cruiser. It was only after her construction was nearly complete 
 that she was changed into a battleship. Afterwards when she was finished 
 according to the new designs, it was found that they did not work out as 
 expected ; and a part of her armament had to be moved further back in order 
 to balance the weight of her powerful ram and keep her head above water. 
 The mechanical principle involved in this operation is well exemplified in the 
 familiar play of see-saw. The greater weight on each end, and the farther 
 apart, the greater the strain, and consequent danger of breaking, of the board 
 or pole. In the case of the " Maine," the greater downward pressure in the 
 bow and towards the centre and rear, in conjunction with the upward pressure 
 of the water acting as a support or fulcrum in the space intervening caused 
 a tension and strain greater than had been calculated for. This strain she 
 proved herself strong enough to withstand successfully for over two years ; 
 but it was all the time weakening her power of resistance and finally produced 
 the catastrophe. This was due, therefore, to no explosion of gun-powder or 
 other combustible from the inside, and still less from the outside, of the 
 vessel. Of the two main explosions so-called, which have been testified to, 
 the first I considered to consist simply in the breaking of the keel, caused by 
 the inevitable operation of natural forces as already stated: and the second, 
 to be the consequent breaking in two and tearing apart of the whole of the 
 ship's superstructure. 
 
 I would call attention especially to the extracts from the testimony of 
 Chief Engineer Howell, Paymaster Ray, and Lieutenant Jungen given at 
 pages 6 and 8 (of the original edition), and particularly to the parts italicized. 
 
 As I am just getting ready to leave on my vacation, I have not time to 
 add anything more nor do I think it necessary. The uncovering of the 
 wreck and the completion of the operations now going on will, I am confident, 
 enable every one who wishes, to test the correctness of the view here put 
 forward; for I cannot agree with the statement in a recent interview that 
 the problem is impossible of solution and that the secret will never be known. 
 
 j^ Yours sincerely, 
 
 LUKE V. McCABE. 
 
Note. — The following communication was sent to the Senate 
 Committee on Foreign Relations with the accompanying note, on 
 Wednesday last. It was also sent to some of the newspapers, but 
 so far they have not seen' fit to publish it. It was prepared from a 
 comparison of several newspaper reports, or rather, extracts from 
 the official report, but I have to-day compared it with the official 
 document, and slightly enlarged a few paragraphs. 
 
 L. V. McCabe. 
 April II, 1898. 
 
 (Copy.) 
 
 To the Honorable C. K. Davis, 
 
 Chairman Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. 
 
 Sir : I fear that your honorable committee, in its investigation 
 of the cause of the Maine disaster, has not considered the probability, 
 or even the possibility, of its being due to the cause set forth in the 
 enclosed communication. 
 
 I request that you at least have it read and given such attention 
 as, in their judgment, it may deserve. 
 
 I regret that I have been unable to send it sooner, but the idea 
 did not suggest itself till after a. study of the evidence, which I 
 began some days after its publication for the purpose of under- 
 standing the precise meaning of a passage occurring in the report 
 of the Court of Inquiry and quoted by the President in his message 
 on the subject. 
 
 With great respect, your obedient servant, 
 
 Luke V. McCabe. 
 
 THE MAINE DISASTER. 
 
 The true cause of the terrible Maine disaster has not yet been 
 ascertained. That it was not due to an internal explosion or to any 
 lack of care and discipline on the part of her officers and men is 
 absolutely certain; the report of the Court of Inquiry and the 
 published testimony establish that much ; but that it was owing to 
 the explosion of a submarine mine, causing the partial explosion of 
 two or more of her forward magazines is not certain ; it is only an 
 inference that appears, indeed, at first sight to follow naturally 
 enough from the truth just stated ; yet it is in reality an unwar- 
 
ranted inference, fi)r it is not the only alternative, an«l a r.ircful and 
 impartial readin.c: <>f the evidence leads, I am convinced, to (|uite a 
 dilTerent conclnsion. 
 
 In the first place, the reports of the cHvers and all the evidence 
 bearinjj;' on the point i^o to show that neither the forward nor the 
 other magazines have exploded at all. What, then, caused the 
 disaster? The question admits of an easy answer and one that 
 appears to satisfy fully all the con<litions of the problem. 
 
 The principal facts respcctinfj the presmt appearance and con- 
 dition of the wreck, as ascertained from the divers' report and from 
 the inspection of the parts now above or near the surface of the 
 water, may be briefly stated as follows : The keel of the Maine for 
 two-thirds of its length, from the stern to the conninj^^-tower sup- 
 ports and central station immediately in front of the forward boilers 
 and fire-room, now rests horizontally on the bottom of the harbor.* 
 Just about the latter point mentioned it bends, and after describing a 
 remarkable curve rises almost perpendicularly to within a few feet 
 of the surface of the water. Here at frame i8 the mighty keel 
 bends again, and after a sharp curve descends at a very steep slant 
 to the bottom, thus forming a sort of large inverted A. The keel 
 proper or flat keel is not broken but bent, and no holes have been 
 discovered in it. but such as belonged to it originally and now serve 
 to identify its different parts. The vertical keel, however, or keel- 
 son, as I take it to be. running along over it. and, of course, rising 
 with it. is broken at or near the top or highest point reached, at 
 frame 17; but this vertical keel was less than one inch thick, and 
 though 36 inches high was weakened at the point of fracture by a 
 three-inch pipe (internal diameter) that had here passed through it. 
 The keel in rising bent also or warped somewhat to starboard, as 
 the top of the inverted A formed by it does not stand in a straight 
 fore-and-aft line with its other parts. The bottom of the ship, 
 which is normally a little over six feet above the plane of the keel, 
 is in this section bent and raised in the same general direction as the 
 latter, the inside plating on the port side at frame 17 appearing 
 four feet above water and the outside forming another immense 
 inverted A, as it is styled, but in reality having a sort of diamond 
 or rhomboid shape, since the divers have found that at about 
 twentv feet or more under water fore and aft parts of the bottom 
 
 * From another report it appears to be " sloping gently upwards." 
 
originally sixty feet apart now approach each other within a few 
 inches. It is to be noticed that this immense plating runs con- 
 tinuously up and down, apparently without a break, and keeps at 
 least generally its proper relative position with respect to the keel. 
 
 It is difficult to conceive an external or any other explosion 
 producing such conditions ; but we know that the Maine " had a 
 tendency to go down by the head." These are the exact words of 
 Naval Constructor Bowles, of the Brooklyn navy yard, as given by 
 the New York Sim of February 23 last, in the interview printed on 
 page. 2; and at the time she was launched I recollect reading in the 
 newspapers that she stuck her nose in the water, but it was hoped 
 that her armament could be so arranged as to remedy this defect. 
 To have this efifect her forward part had, of course, to be com- 
 paratively lightened and her center of gravity moved further back 
 than was at first intended. Even after this readjustment it was 
 considered desirable to empty her forward coal bunkers first for 
 the purpose of lightening her in that region, as the immense weight 
 of her terrible ram or ram-bow, as it is technically called, still tended 
 to draw her head downwards. " These pockets had to be emptied 
 before the coal in the bunkers could be got at ; but Mr. Bowles 
 says that as the Maine had a tendency to go down by the head, it 
 was the custom to empty these pockets and the bunkers beside this 
 magazine" (the forward lo-inch magazine) " among the first." 
 Description of the Maine from Mr. Bowles' interview in New 
 York Sim just referred to. 
 
 What an immense strain this arrangement must have caused 
 to the comparatively light portion of her structure intervening 
 between the ram and the forward boilers ! A strain increased by 
 the consumption of every ton of coal taken from her forward 
 bunkers. True, her strong frame and powerful * keel were able 
 to stand the strain for years ; but it must have been constantly 
 exerting its force, and the power of resistance gradually and im- 
 perceptibly diminishing, it could only have been a question of time 
 when the crash would come. 
 
 At last the crash did come, and just about halfway between 
 the bow and the forward boilers, immediately in front of the 
 foremast, the mighty keel itself gave way, and, following the 
 
 * Powerful indeed for a cruiser, but not enough so for a battleship, if she 
 was to last for any considerable length of time. 
 
line of least resistance, ncct-ssarily fdsc and hent like a fishing rod, 
 tearinj:^ with it and foroin.rj- up the ship's sides, heams, bulkheads, 
 decks, and everythiiii,^ else in its patii. till the fore-and-aft parts of 
 the forward section humped to^vthcr and the strain was relicvcH 
 by the bow striking' bottom and the after part crushinL,'- down and 
 sinking. 
 
 We can now uiKJerstand wh\' the edges of the breaks anfl 
 cracks in the plates present so torn and jagged an appearance, the 
 wrinkling and buckling of the vertical keel, decks, &c.. and the 
 peculiar character of the dull, mutlled. deafening sound or m.-ir first 
 heard, as well as the facts testified to by the spectators on board the 
 City of JVasJiiiigton, which was only 300 feet off to port and astern. 
 
 Let me quote some pertinent passages from the mass of testi- 
 mony given before the Court of Tni|uiry. 
 
 Captain Sigsbee. who at the time of the disaster was in the 
 cabin, near the end of the vessel, says: 
 
 "It was a bursting, rending, or crashing sound or roar of 
 immense volume, largely metallic in character. It was succeeded 
 by a metallic sound, probably of falling debris, a trembling and 
 lurching motion of the vessel, then an impression of subsidence, 
 attended by an eclipse of the electric lights and intense darkness 
 within the cabin." * * * (Senate Document Xo. 207. p. 15.) 
 
 Lieutenant HoLNrAN" describes the sound he heard as consisting 
 of " a low rumbling — comparatively speaking, a low and heavy 
 rumbling — followed by a heavy booming explosion." 
 
 Lieutenant Blow testifies : 
 
 " I was writing at the time and heard forward, and apparently 
 at some distance — that is to say. well up in the bow. as far as I 
 could judge from the sound — an explosion. Instantly the lights 
 went out. T rujhed out of my room to see the cause of it. and 
 before I could get more than six feet from my room a second and 
 much more violent explosion followed. * * * ^[y first im- 
 pression was that we had been fired on. and T remember feeling sur- 
 prised that it shouM have been by such a heavy gim. When the 
 second explosion occurred I recognized the fact that the ship was 
 sinking and had been blown up. * * * 
 
 " Q- Will you please describe your sensation of the first shock 
 a little more fully? 
 
 " A. The first shock was not a verv severe one. although it was 
 sufficient to put all of the lights out. It impressed me as sounding, 
 as nearlv as I can recollect, like a lo-inch gim fired close aboard. 
 
8 
 
 My recollection is that I was surprised that they should fire on us 
 with such larg'e .guns so close aboard. 
 
 " O. Suppose you had heard no report in connection with this, 
 what would you have supposed — what was the shock like ? 
 
 " A. It was a dull concussion, not like the shock of a rapid- 
 firing gun or a 6-inch gun. It was longer and deeper in tone, and 
 also with more of a shake. 
 
 " 0. Did the first explosion, or whatever it was, list the ship 
 any? 
 
 " A. I think not." 
 
 Chief Engineer Howell testified : 
 
 " I was suddenlv startled by an unusual shock. There was then 
 a continued series of convulsions, and a noise like the tearincr of the 
 ship to pieces, then a tremendous crash, then apparently the sound 
 of falling debris. Then the ship felt as if it was wavering and 
 unsteadv of the deck. I noticed no list of the ship until after this 
 series of shocks." 
 
 Pavmaster Ray said: " My first impression, my first shock you 
 might sav. was a sort of an upheaval. My impression then was. 
 from the downward tendency, that the ship had broken in tivo, and 
 that she was sinking." 
 
 Private Anthony, the orderly on duty, was standing on the 
 main deck, iust outside the door (of the captain's cabin), on the 
 starboard side, when he " first noticed a trembling and buckling of 
 the decks, and then this prolonged roar — not a short report, but a 
 prolonged roar. * * * At the first shock the ship instantly — 
 that is, the quarter deck where I was standing — dipped forward and 
 to port. It apparently broke in the middle, surged forward, and 
 then canted over to port. 
 
 " O. Canted over to port after the first shock? 
 
 " A. Yes. It was continually settling more to port while T was 
 on board. * * * 
 
 " O. Did you see any water with it? 
 
 " A. I did not notice that. sir. I started in the cabin at once." 
 
 Lieutenant Blandin, the watch officer on the deck at the time, 
 " saw a flare, but no actual flame. He could not locate definitelv the 
 explosion. He saw no water thrown up by the explosion. Within 
 a minute after the explosion the forward part of the ship was under 
 water. In less than three minutes she was at the bottom. Although 
 Tie was impressed by the idea that there were two explosions, he 
 could not describe the difiference between them. He noticed no up- 
 heaval of the ship." 
 
 Lieutenant Hoop was on the deck at the time of the explosion. 
 ■" The first shock," he said. " felt and sounded like an explosion 
 
inidtT water. Vhc second explosion carried the whole starboarcl 
 side of the forward deck up into the air, and he saw after that an 
 immense mass of foaniinj;" water, wreckaj^e. and jj^roanin^ men. 
 * * * The first (explosion) produced no hij^ wave, but just a 
 mass of foaminjj;' water." 
 
 Captain Ti;.\si).\li-:, of the llritish bark Dcza, testified: 
 
 " Q. When you first saw this thing- was there a large batch of 
 solid flame? 
 
 " A. Xo. ; I didn't see any flame whatever. 
 
 " Q. You are sure you reached the deck in time to see the 
 large explosion? 
 
 " A. I w^as on dock in time to see everything. * * * 
 
 " Q. How nuich of a wave was thrown over in your direction? 
 
 " A. There didn't seem to be much of a wave with us, but there 
 was a decided movement of the vessel shortly afterwards. * * * 
 
 " O. Did you see any dead fish around the bay ? 
 
 " A. I never saw any ; no, sir. 
 
 " Q. Have you ever heard that fish leave this harbor at night 
 and go outside? 
 
 " A. I never heard any remark about that. I have seen a good 
 many fish here, but they were very small fish — just spluttering about 
 on the top of the water." * * "■■' 
 
 Captain Stevens, of the City of Washington: "Heard a dull, 
 mufiled explosion and commotion, like as though it were under 
 water, followed instantly by a terrific explosion. * * * 
 
 " O. Did you feel any trembling of your own ship at either of 
 the explosions? 
 
 " A. The last one I did. but the first one I did not. Everything 
 shook. * * * My first impression was, when I heard this noise. 
 that it was a gun or a salute, but then changed instantly." 
 
 SiGMUxn RoTSCHiLD, a passenger on the C/7y of JJ^ashingtoii. 
 said : 
 
 " The noise of a shot attracted his attention to the Maine, and 
 he saw her hoiv rise up out of the w^ater, follozced closely by the 
 terrific explosion. * * * jj-j jggs than a minute her bow had 
 disappeared." 
 
 I would call special attention to the two following passages. 
 The first is from the testimony of Lieutenant Jungex (Official 
 Document, p. 132) : 
 
 " It was not an explosion. It was a dull, deafening roar, fol- 
 lowed immediately by a tremendous crash, and it seemed as though 
 the zi'hole ship zcas falling to pieces." 
 
lO 
 
 The other is from the examination of Captain Sigsbee: 
 
 " Q. Do you think that the forward six-inch magazine blew up ? 
 
 " A. I do not think so. I cannot find reason to suppose so. 
 One man, at least, was blown out of the forward superstructure into 
 the water. It is more than probable that he would have been blown 
 to atoms if the magazine had exploded." 
 
 It will be remarked that this opinion of the captain was subse- 
 quently fully borne out by the condition of the shells and powder- 
 tanks found by the divers, the powder itself having apparently been 
 dissolved by the water and converted into mud. 
 
 In this connection I may appropriately quote a paragraph from 
 a prominent Philadelphia newspaper. The Record ( of this morning's 
 issue, April ii) : 
 
 " It will be recalled by those whose memories are even moder- 
 ately retentive that Captain Sigsbee, in his testimony before the 
 Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, which was printed in all 
 the newspapers, absolutely declined to express any opinion, when 
 asked who was responsible for the destruction of his ship. The 
 story, widely published yesterday and vouched for by a member of 
 the committee, to the effect that Captain Sigsbee had sworn that the 
 Maine was blown up by a mine connected by wire either from the 
 shore or from the Alphonso XII, was therefore a monstrous and 
 malignant falsehood. The fellow who started this mischievous and 
 designedly inflammatory rumor ought to be publicly whipped." 
 
 Yet this is but one of the many falsehoods that have been circu- 
 lated in regard to the whole lamentable affair. For instance, no 
 evidence whatever was brought before the Court of Inquiry for the 
 report that windows were broken and houses shaken in Havana by 
 the shock occasioned by the destruction of the Maine. 
 
 I do not think it necessary to enlarge here on the facts proved 
 by the evidence quoted, and by more that might be quoted, that no 
 jet of water was thrown up, no big wave produced, and no dead 
 fish found in the harbor in order to prove the falsity of the inference 
 that because there was no internal explosion, therefore there must 
 have been an external one. What to my mind is decisive is the 
 ascertained position and condition of the keel and of the bottom 
 plating, which. I am persuaded, could be produced by no explosion, 
 external or otherwise. What has been called the center of impact 
 should have been called the center of least resistance. 
 
 The only conclusion, from all the established facts and the pub- 
 lished evidence in the case, that is at all warranted is, I am con- 
 
II 
 
 vinccd, that the destruction of the Maine was cause<l by ncilher an 
 internal nor an external explosion, but was due to her forward part 
 breaking in two by reason of defective construction and the strain 
 resulting from the disproportionate weight of her rani. 
 
 That her officers have not thought of this, but have attributed 
 it to a supposed submarine mine, is not to be wondered at, when we 
 consider the tension to which their minds have been subjected and 
 the prepossessions which naturally suggested such an explanation, 
 especially as the real cause was one which could not have come 
 under their observation. Something of the force of these preposses- 
 sions we can understand when we find an officer supposing that they 
 had been fired on without a moment's notice, and at once rushing 
 to his quarters — that is, to the station assigned him in case of battle. 
 " Mv first impression was that we had been fired on. * * * 
 My impulse had been at first to go to my quarters, but at the second 
 explosion I abandoned all thought of this and realized that it was 
 a question of whether I could reach the deck or not before the 
 ship sank." 
 
 It is a satisfaction to find that the supposed enemies proved to 
 be friends, and to read in Mr. Rotschild's testimony that " the boats 
 of the Spanish warship Alphonso XII were prompt to go to the 
 rescue and were aided by the search-lights." 
 
 The real cause seems never to have occurred to the court or 
 others as even a possible one, and accordingly no expert or specialist 
 was examined with particular reference to the points now brought 
 forward. 
 
 I am confident that if this matter is properly brought to the 
 notice of the public the honor and conscience of the country will 
 demand that the Maine disaster shall be further investigated with 
 the aid of specialists in mathematical and mechanical science, its 
 true cause ascertained, and the responsibility placed where it 
 properly belongs. 
 
 L. V. McCabe. 
 OvERBROOK, Pa., April 4.