The Birmingham age-herald., 1920-03-08
TRIO OF REPORTS
 ON NAVAL PROBE
 ARE MADE PUBLIC
Three Republican Members of Committee Criticise Daniels While Demo
 crats Defend Him
B, As.ssi.i.s rrsss


 Washington, March 7.-Thet wrangie over awards to navy officers of war decorations drew. nearer concIusios tonight when Chairman Page of the Senate naval committee made public the trio of reports the tigators of the subcommittee produced
 The three republican members joined in the majority report, Which sharply criticised Secretary Daniels in some respects; while the two democrats sub mitted individual reports defenndint; the secretatT's course and directing their attack, in turn, al Rear Admiral William & Sirs, the most prominent figure In the controversy stirred up over navy medals and crosses.
 In one respect the threes reports
 arc unique. They agree on two
 pcintsg that no permanent harm has
 como to naval morale result of
 the awards on the controversy, and
 that enlisted men received too
 small a share of recognition for
 their services 70 ~+asa
 The majority report, signed by Sem ators Hale, Mccormick and Poindexter. arraigns Mir. Daniels for not having fully advised his officers as to his plans in making awards and asserts that his policy of decorating officers who lost ships would be detrimental to the navy senator Pi.tnlan,. in the first minority report, characterized the investigation as a. tempest in a teapot ---''too ridiculous to be mentioned in connection with the morale of fight ing navy"
 In the second minority report.
 Senator Trammell declared flatly thnt navy morale had not been harmed, ms Admiral sims had con-
 tended, and asserted that MT. Dan-
 feIs followed established naval cus-
 tom in changing recommendations
 of his subordinates. as those off,
 ccrs themselves had done with pro-
 posaIs of their juufors-'
 That Secretary Daniels did not make known to the service his policy as to awards especially with regard to ths relative importance of duty on shore and afloat Fewer changes would have boon necessary later had he done SO. the report said ~ That the Secretary did not ascertain from the officers who recommended honors the relative order of merit and did not himself give sufficient consid r eration to that question. injury to nor 1 ale and depreciation of the. value of 1 awards resulting.
 MAJORITY REPORT CONCLUSION | tThnt secretary lpAflltuS old Hois kcr l usiire h asifftrfe Ai " hish stansfafd ot ineritorions donduet in eoaferrin: 2: horers on effiyrs who los ships and ! was more aealous to further the in- i tefest of Commanders who lost shin /, than of other commanders whoa instead ! of losing their ships, destroyed pr seri- ousiy damaged the ships of the enemy i That the statute governing naval awards should be amended to avoid fu- 1 cure controversy.
 l In regard to certain matters" not 1 directly connected with the question of awards developed during the hearings. referring to charges as to lack of full co operation with the allied admiral ties made by Admiral Sims, the repore said they were not at this time within the province of tho committee The whole purpose of the subcomn1it- tee, 1t continued. has been not to decide the personal differences between offi- | cers of the navy or officers of the I navy and officials of the navy depart tContinued on Page Twc)