Evening star., 1920-03-08
MAJORITY REPORT
ON MEDAL AWARDS
SCORES DANIELS
Senate Committee. However,
Finds Navy Morale Not
Harmed by Controversy.

Harmed by Controversy.
Three separate reports from the
naval subcommittee which recently
the award Of war decorations TO Navy
officers were before the Senate today
a majority report signed by the three
republican members OF the commit
tee. Senators Fa.e. Mccormick and
Poindexter. sharply criticised Secre-
tary Daniels for net having fully ad-
vised officers as to his plans in max
ing awards and asserted that his
policy of decorating officers who lost
their ships would be detrimental to
the Navy.
Substance OF Other Reports.
The other reports were submitteh
by Senators Pi3nan and Trammeli.
the two democratic members OF the
investigating committee. Each de
Tended Mr.. Daniels course and di-
rected their attacks at Rear Admiral
Sims. who precipitated the wranglc
by criticis;nG the naval secretary s
course. Senator Pittnan characterized
the whole affair as a TEMPEST IN q
teapot" and Senator Tramm@tf De
ciared that the Navy's morale had
Admiral Sims. He further said chat
Mr.. Daniels had followed established
naval custom in changing recon-
mendations of his suhordinates:
On two points all three OF the re-
ports agreed. The first was that no
harm had come to naval morale as a
result Of the awards or the. contro-
verSy The second was that enlisted
men received too small a share of
recognition Tor their services.
The majority report reached the
following conclusions:
That Secretary Daniels did not make
known to the service his policy as to
awards. especially with regard to the
relative Importance of duty on shore
and afoat Fewer changes would
have been necessary later had he done
so. the report said.
Insumcient Confederation.
That the Secretary did not ascer-
ed honorS tfe relative order of merit.
and did not himself give sufficient
consideration to that question. injury
to morale and depreciation of the
value of awards resulting.
That Secretary Daniels did not re-
quire a sufficiently high standard of
meritorious conduct in conferring
fonors on officers who lost ships. and
was more jealous to further the in
terest of commanders who lost ships
stead of losing their ships. destroy ed
or seriously damaged the ships of the
enemy.
That the statute governing naval
awards should be amended to avoid
future controversy.
In regard to certain matters not
directly connected with the question
of awards developed during the
hearings, referring to charges as to
lack of full cooperation with the al
lied admiralties made by Admiral
Sims. the report said that they were
not at this time within the province
of the committee.
Working for Nays Interests.
THE whole purpose of the subcom
mittee." he continued. has been not
to decide the personal difference be-
tween officers of the Navy or between
officers of the Navy and officials of
the Navy Department; but to assist
in arriving at a settlement of the
questions of awards in the Navy which
shall be for the best interests of the
Navy
The majority report laid stress on
it's statement that no attempt had
been made to ascertain the order of
merit among those recommended for
decorations. This was most unfor-
tunate." it added, and the signers be-
lieved commanding officers were best
able to gauge relative merit.
Had such a policy prevailed" 1t
continued, the subcommittee is of the
opinion that the men most entitled
to awards would have received them"
Senator Pittman contended that the
investigation was unnecessary be-
cause the naval award matter was
being reinvestigated by the knight
board by direction of Secretary DAN
iels when the investigating committee
sional Investigations of similar
character" he said. 'it served no
beneficial purpose"
Glory Never Before Questioned.
'The airing Of the personal griev-
ances OF an admiral and giving pub
licity to critical and reprecatory
statements made by the admiral with
regard to the accomplishments of the
Navy during the war tended to be-
srnirch a glory never before QueS-
toned" Senator Pittman said.
Admiral Sims believed. the senator
said. that the distinguished service
few Of the highest officers in the
Navy, and that it would be cheapened
by awarding it to junior officers and
enlisted men.
Criticising Admiral Sims for having
made special point Of alleged injus-
tice to six members of his staff. Sen
ator Pittman declared that the award
of a distinguished service medal to
Commander D. w. Bagley. Secretary
Daniels law, about whom
much of the controversy centered
was justified. The senator also as
sailed Admiral Sims conduct before
the committee. which he said would
lead a civilian to believe that the Of
ficer was deeply impressed with Brit
ish policies and practices" and more
familiar with British ideas, customs
and manners than with those of his
own country"
Following Naval Custom.
Senator Trammell, democrat, Flori-
da, in separate report. said that Sec
retary Daniels, in changing recon-
mendationS made by commanding Of
ficers and the Knight board, was fol-
lowing established naval custom and
the same policy was pursued by Ad-
miral Sims with regard to recon-
mcndations made to him.
Admiral Sims criticism Of Secre-
tary Daniels. Senator Trammell said
implied also criticism of Admira Is
Mayo, Gleaves, Grant, Niblack, the
other naval officers, all of whom ex-
ercised their own Judgment in pass
ing on the recommendations of sub
ordinates.
The report said those officers whose
duty it was to initiate recommends
tions were recreant in their duty in
so far as enlisted men were concerned
1t added that no difference of opinion
existed between the majority of naya
officers and Secretary Daniels re-
sarding the decoration of officers who