Page:How We Advertised America (1920).djvu/62

 columns at the very same time thundered editorially against the "Fourth of July hoax" and gravely condemned me for what they were pleased to term my "flamboyancies."

All the while we were awaiting the return of Admiral Gleaves in order to receive the full report that it was his duty to file with the Commander-in-Chief of the fleet. In the mean time, just as the newspaper attack was abating, Senator Penrose called up his resolution and for a day the Chamber rang to a bitter debate. In his most brazen manner, Penrose declared that the American public had been "regaled on the Fourth of July with the bombastic account of a battle which never occurred, and relating to a squadron which crossed the ocean in placid seas and arrived on the other side without an important event."

Senator Swanson of Virginia openly charged dishonest purpose. Senator Penrose, he said, had been informed by the Navy Department that every one of the documents in the case was at his disposal, including the original cable from Admiral Gleaves, and his flat refusal to avail himself of the offers proved that he had no interest in facts. Senator James of Kentucky talked plainly of "copperheadism" and coined a new word when he substituted "Penrosing" for "sniping." Nothing came of the resolution because it was never meant that anything should come of it. Having hurled his insults and launched his charges, nothing was farther from the Penrose mind than that there should be any hearing at which his assertions might be answered.

At last, however, after what seemed an interminable delay, the report of Admiral Gleaves came to hand, and not only did it bear out the original statement in every degree, but went beyond it. I submit a verbatim copy of the document: