Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1919-12-24
Reply to Admiral
Not Yet Written
by Secretary.
ATTITUDE AS TO
CREWS is STATED
Acted Conscientiously
in Approving Hon.
ors, He Declares.

Ors, He Declares.
Secretary Daniels said today he had
not yet written his reply to the letter of
Admiral Sims in connection with the
| refusal of the commander of American
naval forces in European waters to sc-
oept the distinguished service medal.
Il regret deeply that the spirit OF
! rivalry among members of the Navy.
which did such wonderful work in the
war. should mar the spirit of Christmas"
! Secretary Daniels told correspondents
/ at a conference today.
Il acted conscientiously in approving
the awards" he said ''and | am i'm favor
( of not only rewarding the captain of a
, vessel which did great service in the
| war with suitable honors, but every
| member of the crew should get the same
decoration also.
Token Of Mems GnIInntry.
I'm awarding honors to the com
| mander he should not forget that
| while he is personally being COM
mended for distinguished service. the
award also should be a token of the
| gallantry of the men under him.
1t was pointed out that in the list
| of nineteen recommendations for dis
unguished service medals made by Ad
| miral Sims for members of his staff the
knight board reduced all but six to
the award of the naval cross.
i Upon receipt of the boards findings
and recommendation, Secretary Dam
| iels reduced three of the boards
recommendations for distinguished
| elevated three. of the boards Navy
cross men to the distinguished service
| medal class.
Calls Rivalry Pathetic.
Secretary Daniels declared that the
| rivalry existing in Navy circles is
pathetic" in view of the 'stick-to-
gether'' qualities exhibited by both
shore and sea service men during the
war. He said Recommendations have
! been made for about 1000 special
decorations, each recommendation
being. of necessity, carefully investi-
gated.
1T is hard-mighty hard-to ferret
out just who does and who does not
merit awards" said Mr.. Daniels. ut
| is too bad that this discussion should
| have come at this time. Rivalry takes
| the bloom of the Nays gallant war
record"
! Strong indications today pointed to
! a thorough congressional investiga
ton not only of the Sims controversy.
but OF the entire system of awarding
naval hohors. The Senate naval com
mittee will probably meet as soon
Congress reconvenes after the Christ
action is expected to be taken by that
body.
To Demand Full Report.
Representative Lufkin of Massa-
chusetts, member of the House naval
committee, said he would ask the
House when it reoonvenes to demand
a full report from Secretary Daniels
relating to the awards of decorations.
Admiral Sims. it is expected. will be
summoned before the naval affairs
committee early next month.
Senator PoindeXter, in discussing
the Sims CONTROVERSY said. he believes
from a personal standpoint that the
committee should summon Admiral
Sims. Secretary Daniels and the
knight board to throw light on the
subject.
At the request of Chairman Page
of the Senate naval committee, Sec
rotary Daniels has submitted his re-
port of the award of decorations.
Mr.. Daniels Outlines Plan.
Secretary Daniels report to Chair
man Page of the Senate naval com
mittee outlines the general polio.
followed by the Secretary in award
ing medals and distinctions to naval
officers and enlisted men.
Indicating that the entire contro-
yersy that has now come to light re-
wolves around the old Navy Depart
ment disagreement as to which class
of service-Shore or seas most I'M
portant Secretary Daniels in his re-
port said:
The value of the duty on shore
was duly recognized. but in my opin-
ion it should be of the highest inn
portance and responsibility in order
that this duty should be recognized
by the award of the same kind of
medals as that given to officers
charged with great responsibility and
at the same time in positions OF
grave danger in the active war zone.
and this was the standard which any
Il mo a
officer on shore duty to be awarded
the medal
His Views to Rewards
E,mnhasizing his belief that officers
engaged in hazardous and responsible
duties in the North sea mining SQUAD
ron the destroyer force, the convoy
and the armed guard service. should
be given preference in the award OF
high honors over officers serving on
shore, even in positions of great respon-
sbility. and officers serving with ships
i'm home waters, Secretary Daniels said
that the services rendered by these
different forces was recognized by the
board of awards in assigning certain
medals to the officers in command OF
the ships and stations concerned and
this plan of procedure met my APP
prevail
With this policy in mind. Secretary
Daniels said he had changed, however.
the recommendations Of the board OF
awards convened under Rear Admiral
Austin NJ. Knight. in the case of d num-
Der of officers serving on shore at home
or in home waters, so that such officers
would receive decora tions of lesser value
than officers serving in the face of the
enemy overseas.
As to Officers of Sunken ships.
In contrast to Admiral Sims state
ment that the commanding officers OF
ships sunk by enemy submarines should
not receive decorations. Mr. Daniels
in his report, said:
In addition to the recognition of
the service rendered by the officers
and men of the forces above uh.s-
toned there was also. of course, the
case of particular individuals whose
conduct was outstanding and who
should be singled out for special
recognition. 1t was my opinion that
the distinguished service medal should
be awarded to those officers in COM
mand of ships of the Navy which
were sunk by submarine attack and
whose conduct was meritorious in
such cases. l required all these cases
to be carefully investigated and as a,
result of this every officer reported
meritorious in command of such a
ship was awarded a dintinguished
service medal"
Commenting on the fact that the
knight board originally recommended
CONTINUED on Second Page.)