Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1920-01-24
HEAD OF NAWMAY
| Be HEARD TUESDAY
Secretary to Explain Medal
Awards Before Senate
Subcommittee.

Secretary Daniels of the Navy will
be called upon to explain his decisions
| in the award of naval decorations, when
| he appears before the Senate naval
affairs subcommittee, probably next
| Tuesday. 1t is expected that the hear
! ings on the awards of naval decora-
| tons will conclude with the testimony
| of the Secretary.
Legislation designed to differentiate
| sharply between decorations awarded
| naval officers and men for ''meritorious
and Distinguished service and for
''valor" was proposed yesterday after
noon by Rear Admiral Austin NJ knight,
recently on medal recommendations. to
the Senate subcommittee investigat-
ing decoration awards.
One reason for the existing contro-
versy. Admiral knight asserted, lay in
the fact that there was no medal avail
able except the congressional medal Of
honor. awarded only in very excep-
tiona1 cases, for acts of extreme
heroiSu.
Nays Morale Unaffected.
Rear Admirals Charles J. Badger,
former COMMUNICATIVE chief Of the At
lantic fleet. and De Witt c. Coffman,
former commander of the second bat
tleship force of the Atlantic fleet,
whose testimony closed the investiga-
ton with the exception of the hear
ing of Secretary Daniels, said that in
their opinion the morale of the Navy
would not be permanently affected ad-
Versely by the present decoration con-
troversy.
Il have such a firm faith in the
good. common sense of the officers
and men of the Navy said Admiral
Coffman. that l do not think the
service morale will be injured by the
present CONTROVERSY
Il believe the loyalty and good
sense of the Navy" agreed Admiral
Badger. will prevent any permanent
injury to morale from disputes grow
Admiral knight suggested that
Congress revise the entire medal leg
islation and create a decoration to
be given only for valor in cases where
the act of heroism was not remarkable
enough to warrant awarding a medal
Of honor. At present, he said. the
Navy cross was awarded for heroism
when the act was not sufficient to
earn medal of honor and for dis
tinguished service when the service
was not important enough to war
rant distinguished service medal.
Uncertainty ms to Service.
Thus" he added, when you see a
naval officer wearing a Navy cross.
you do not know whether he got it
and. in fact, the only medal we have
that stands only for valor is the
medal of honor"
The admiral suggested as a tenn
porary expedient that the Navy De-
partment authorize the wearing Of a
clasp marked for valor" on all Navy
crosses awarded for heroism.
Chairman Hale of the subcommittee
said the admiraPs suggestions would
be given careful consideration and
would be included in the committees
report with a view to framing legisIa-
ton along the lines suggested.
Admiral Coffman indicated in his
testimony that the recommendations
of the knight board had been ruth
lessly" changed by Secretary Daniels.
Asked by Chairman Hale if his own
recomm endation had been ruthlessly
changed Admiral Coffman replied that
he did not like to answer the ques-
ton Sin that FORM" but said:
II do not know they were changed
and I think the officers recommen ended
for awards by the board deserved
what they were recommended for and
when they were changed it was a
matter felt, and felt very deeply"