Norwich bulletin., 1919-12-24

Washington. Dec. 23.-Dissatlsfac- ton within the navy at the way Sec tary Daniels has arranged the awards Of decorations for war service came ito the surface today when it became known that Admiral Sims. former commander of American naval forces in European waters, had declined to accept his distinguished service medal while the awards remain as at pres ent. -lA...
 At the same time the row. which up to this time has been a smouldering ono, appeared in congress. Chairman Page of the senate naval committee asked for a report on the awarding of the decorations, and Secretary Daniels transmitted 1t to him tonight. Meanwhile Representative Lufkin. re publican, of Massachusetts, a member iof the house naval committee. an .nounced that he would ask the house to call for a similar report.
 Coming as the climax to published charges that Secretary Daniels had rearransed the whole list of awards. raising some officers to higher dis tinction than recommended and blue pencilIing" others. publication of Ad- miral Sims action created a new sensation in the department.
 The whole thing has been brought e d head by the action of Admiral SiEas, who, writing an official com muniration to Secretary Daniels from the naval war colleeg at Newport. E. l.. fllas set forth that officers for wliom lie recommended the distin guished service medal-highest of all naval decorations except the con- gressional medal of honor-received by the secretary's revision decora- tion of lesser value, and that other officers whose duties and services Ad- miral Sims considered as of lesser value, received by the revision the mere valued decoration. At, the same time, it develops, Admiral Sims sent franked copies of his letter to many naval officers in Washington. His ac- ton became known. first through them, and later today MT. Daniels gsye out the letter. without comment. Earlier in the day however MT. Dam fels had announced that he had pre- pared the report asked for by Senator Page, and tonight after traIisnIitting 1t 10 the senator made public copies of It.. ~ .fs s9
 Admiral Sims in his letter does, not appear to.'refuse his decoration un- eonditionallss He refused it under the conditions he outlines and he asks for an opportunity to expla in the reasons for his original recommendal tions. Besides that, the admiral does not ask that the highest award be taken from any officers upon whom If already has been conferred. But he docs ask for revision upward of some of the lesser decorations.
 Sims. long known as the stormy petrel of the navy, since his sensa- tional last drop of blood speech ir kr1f of \ drew Inc attention of the forcign of ficers of Berlin, London and Wash 1nston. has figured in navy sensa ttons before and has many warn supporters among the officers --. f
 Secretary Daniels report 10 Chair. man Page of the senate naval com, ynittee outlines the general policy fol lowed by the secretary in awardins medals and distinctions to naval of ficers and enlisted mon.--
 Indicating that the entire contro. Versy has now come to light revolvel around the old navy department dis agreement as to which class of ser; bice-shore or sei-is most impor. tant, Secretary Daniels in his repor said: ... .., i.,. lte.9 -
 "The value of the duty on shor, was duly recognized, but in my opin ion 1t should be of the highest innnor tsnce and responsibility in order tha this duty should be recognized by tn award of the same kind of medals a that given to officers charged witt great responsibility and at the sam time in positions of grave danger il the achievement war zone. and thi was the standard which any particu lar case had to meet for an officer ,ol shore duty. to be awarded the medal.
 Emplia sizing his belief that officer engaged in hazardous and responsibI duties in the North sea ninin squadron the destroyer force, th convoy and the armed guard service should be given preference in tn award of high honors over officer serving on shore, even, in position or great responsibility, and officer serving with ships in hCme water, Secretary Daniels said that "the ser vices rendered by these differer forces was recognized by the board ( awards in assigning certain medals the officers in command of the shir and stations concerned, and this pla of procedure met my approval"
 With this policy in mind. Secretar Daniels says he had changed, how ever, the recommendation of tf board of awards convened under Rea Admiral Austin M. Knight in the cas
 
 shore at home or in home waters $ that such officers would receive dec orations of lesser value than officel serving in the face of the enem overseas. -. e.
 In contrast to Admiral Sims, statt Inent that the commanding officers snips sunk by enemy submarin, shed,d not receive decorations, M Daniels in his report said:
 Tn addition to the recognition the service rendered by the office and men of the forces above mention ed. there was also. of course, the ca qs particular individuals whose col Auct was outstanding and who shou be singled out for special recognitio 1t was my opinion that the distii kuished service medal should i awarded to those officers in commar Of ships of the navy who were sur by. submarine attacks and whose .coi duct was meritorious in such case I required all these cases to be car fully investigated and. as a result
 this every oficer reported meritoriol in command Of such ship VI awarded distinguished servi medal
 Commenting on the fact that tK Knight board originally recommend, only eight officers and men who ser ed in the armed guards on board me chant ships for decora tions. the se retary said that in view of the .ha, hrdous nature Of such duty, and aft Icsreful investigation he had incfaas, khe number of decorations award,