South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1919-12-24
NEDAL QUESTION
NAY Be BROUGHT
UP IN CONGRESS
CONTINUED FROM PAGE ONBJ

4 T 4 -
admiral does not ask that the high
est award be taken from any Off
Ger upon whom it already has been
conferred but ne does ask for a re-
vision upward of some OF the lesser
decorations.
Sims. long known as the stormy
petrol OF the navy, since his sensa-
tional last drop Of blood" speech
in the Guild Hall at London, when
no drew the attention of the foreign
offices Of Berlin. London and Wash
ingtOn, has figured in naval sensa-
tions before and has many warm
supporters among the officers.
Secy Daniels report 10 Chairman
Page. OF the senate naval commit
tee. outlines the general policy Of
the secretary in awarding medals
and distinctions 20 naval officers
and enlisted men
Indicating that the entire con-
troversy that has now come TO light
revolves around the old navy de-
partment agreement as TO which
class of service. shore or sea, is
most important. Secretary Daniels
i'm his report said:
Duty on shore.
"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 90 Officers
charged with great responsibility
and at the same time i'm positions
of grave danger i'm the active war
zone, ana this was the standard
which any particular case had 10
meet for an officers on shore duty
10 he awarded the medal"
Emphasizing his belief that Off
GERS engaged I'm hazardous and re
spOnsible duties in the North sea
mining squadron. the destroyer
force the convoy ana the armed
guard services should be given pref
erence i'm the award Of high honors
over officers serving on shore. even
in positions Of great responsibility
and officers serving with ships in
home waters Sec'y Daniels said that
the services rendered by these diff
ferent forces was recognized by the
board Of awards i'm assigning certain
medals TO the officers in command
of the ship and stations concerned
and that this plan of procedure mes
his approval.
Explains Action.
With this policy in mind Sec'y
r,I al h.. oh
ever. the recommendation of the
board OF awards convened under
Rear Admiral Austin NJ. Knight, in
the case of n number of officers
serving on shore, at home. or in
home waters, so that such officers
would receive decorations of lesser
value than officers serving in the
face OF the enemy overseas.
In contrast 10 Admiral Sims
statement that the commanding Of
ricers of ships sunk by enemy sub
marines should not receive decora-
tions. Mr.. Daniels in his report
said
I'm addition TO the recognition of
the service rendered by the officers
and men Of the forces above men
toned. there was also, Of course.
the case of particular individuals
whose conduct was outstanding and
who should be singled out for spe-
cial recognition. 1t was my opinion
that the distinguished service medal
should be awarded 10 those officers
in command of ships. of the navy
which were sunk by submarine at
tack and whose conduct was meri-
torious in such cases. I required all
these cases to be carefully investi-
gated and as a result Of this every
officer reported meritorious in the
command of such a ship was award
ed a distinguished service medal"