How Did The Court Of Inquiry During The Spanish American War

The United States Navy during the Spanish American War was not the military superpower that it is in the modern age. The navy was in a state of transition during the War, a strategic shift from guerre de course to guerre d’escadre. This began with the War of Rebellion (1861-1865), the last major war before the Spanish American War. The Union’s strategy for the war was to blockade the Confederate States from European support while simultaneously seizing southern rivers in order to split the south apart. This is the strategy of a guerre d’escadre navy, and the Union would require a grand increase in the number of ships in order to enact this plan. The north would spend the time and money needed to acquire nearly 600 vessels. But many of them
While the former was correctly determined, the latter was incorrectly determined. Rear Admiral Sampson was not present during the fighting and neither were the actions of Rear Admiral Schley, the commanding officer in Rear Admiral Sampson’s absence, so decisive for victory. The credit should have been given to the individual captains of the ships present during the fighting, as they each commanded their own ships actions during the fighting in order to achieve victory. The court of inquiry had also revealed to the public major issues within the naval service that could have prevented the nation from completing its shift to a naval superpower. The three main issues were arrogance and bias, miscommunication, and error-ridden reports. These issues highlighted the inadequacy of the United States Navy. Even though we are building ships and becoming a stronger navy, the public being reminded of the problems and lack of detail could have swung the government away from funding. The removal of proper funding would have led to the regression of the United States Navy and completely stopped its transition into a naval