New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1919-12-28
vance their reasons ior recommending
members Of their force for the honor.
Senate to Get Data

vance their reasons ior gecommen dinl
members of their force for the honor.
Senate to Get Data
The Naval Board Ct Award, on which
the spotlight in the controversy is nov
turned. is composed Of Rear Admirals
Austin NJ. Kn;g't, chairman; NJ. I
Endlcot., G j. badger and De Wit
LEHMAN, Captains j. II. Linnard. D. II
Tfibou, John T. Boyd and NJ. NJ. Nc Don.
aid; Colonel p. st. Clair Murphy. OF
the Marine Corps. and Lieutenant Com.
mander ,Iukes, recorder
Secretary Daniels said his decision
to cali the board il session 70 review
his action on The original awards and
to decide on cases that have developed
Will not interfere with the Navy he
rartment furnishing to the Senate
Committee on Naval Affairs complete
lie of all recommendations and data
on which The announced list Of awards
was based
THIS data. Secretary Daniels said
VII show fcst the or gina! recon
mentation b. the captain or command
ing officer Of q command The sp-
provas az disaprroYal of these recon-
Hleuds IONS nv the admiral under whose
commend the officers making the
Jeccnlme udations operated also viii be
given, as we'll as the navy boards de-
ciSior. and me action took IN approv-
ing, disappearing or changing the
boards award
Daniels Avoids Personal Controversy
Secretary Daniels continued to-day
TO maintain au attitude OF refusing to
make the naval award matter per
sonal controversy between admiral
SINS and himself. He said he would
make no reply TO imiral Sims's lette =
declining the Distinguished Service
MEDIA other than to instruct the Blu
,eau Of Navigation to acknowledge ro-
ceipt OF tie communication.
Ny decision to A.He ite Naval
said. is NY answer TO ali the letters.
This board VIII receive ali the facts
ard vii make its Judgment and give
its answer after considerations"
When Nh Daniels's attention was
called to the report that Admiral Sims
and Admiral Henry B. Wilson had dis
agreed materially in directing the
American naval forces in foreign wa
ters, and that Admiral Sims had wit
ten q letter crlticlslng Admiral Will
son to the Navy nopariment, Secretary
OF the hes, liked men in London anc
Wilson was the popular man IN
Paris.
"7hey both did great piece Of
work" Mr. Daniels said III they don I
appreciate each other it is no concern
.of mine, l appreciate them both.
gave them both the best navy has IT,
give. If they don't love each other
they ought to-
Regarded as Danielas Victory
Naval officers who have upheld Sec
Rotary Danielss attitude IN declining
TO authorize naval decorations for Off
GERS and men not actively in the z0re
,of action remarked tonight that the
Naval Secfetary's decision TO les the
Pres ident decide who is to be rewarded
was d victorious stroNe. They pointed
.out that the recovering Of the Board
of AWa~d means that navy officers
Themselves are to determine which of
their fellows and their subordinatcs
are 10 he decorated Secretary Daniels
is relieved com pietaly OF any blame ii
ljnjusticcs creep in. 1t likewise Was
poir ted or that no naval officer would
be likely to decline IA decora non which
comes "by order OF the commander in
,.chlef Of he Army and NAvy,' the
> President, and that the feet OF Nh
rDanielss decision Will be to compel
Admiral Sim and other protesting
navel officers TO accept the awards au-
thorlzeG fer thcnl.
!. Feels Vonor Is Undeserved
In his letter Captain Fasbrouck
SAID.
Il In viaw of my strong personal
conviction Of The fitness and justice OF
Admire SIMS 5 summing up o, the I'm
DERIVING reasons FOR the award Of
nav;. honors, and as set forth in ar
tic'es ) ana lG CT his letter of De-
cember II, 1918, / request t;.at my
name DC stricken from the list of
awards OF the Navy Cross.
"2 have u higher regard for Adj
mlral SIMS 5 views on matters affect
ing the morale OF the naval service
It IAN those OF any other Ofhoer. Con-
curing SO unfeservedly in his views
canno,, cor 5teiItiy ard with honeht,
to myself, accept an honor which l per-
sonaiy feel Is undaservod.'
Mayo Criticzes Awards
Rear Admiral Mayo's criticism was
conveyed to Secretary Daniels IN thu
following letter:
Il. A carolN examination II the list
OF officers TO who have been awarded
the Distinguished Service Medal and
the Navy Cross shows that in many
cases the recomme ndations Of the COM
mander in chief, United States fleet,
were not carried out.
so. 1t is apparent that there has been
a misconception of the nature of the
responsibility OF the duties of various
officers and Of the value Of their SER
Vices in bringing about ultimate
victory.
g. All recommendation for awards
lich originated with or were passed
upon hv TIE commander in chief.
United States fleet, were carefully con-
sidered in order to establish a uni
form standard of respons bility and
distinction upon which might be based
the commander in chic IS action as to
his recommendation
"A. No one not intimately connected
with the operations of the fleet is so
Wei qualified to establish the relative
Importance Of the services performed