Norwich bulletin., 1920-01-05
Daniels Replies to
 Attack on Awards
Explains How He Differen- tiated Between Awards For Officers on Sea Duty and Those on Land.

Washington, Jan. A. Secretary Daniels replied today to attacks on his awards of navy decorations in a letter to Chairman Page of the sen ate naval committee, which, with the house naval committee, probably will investigate the whole row precipitated by the refusal of Rear Admiral Sims and other officers to accept the dec orations awarded to them.
 The complaint of the officers was that in some instances Secretary Daniels had changed the recommenda- tions of the official board which sat, on the cases. bestowing higher decora- tions tan the officers thought merited. in some cases and lower ones in others.
 Besides reviewing the details of each case and quoting from the fnd- lngs of original boards of inquiry in 1 the cases. Secretary Daniels explains at length the theory on which hesired l with some of the awards as finally recommended to him. The secretary l explains also how he differentiated | between awards for officers who served at sea ana those who served on 1 land
 MT. Daniels refers to his first com munication to Chairman Page, in l which he set forth the principle that 1 the highest distinction should be con- l ferred upon officers and men who had 1 come in contact with the enemy and 1 by courage and judgment under attack exempHfied the highest traditions of 1 the service and that the distinguished | service medal sould also be awarded | only to tose officers on shore duty | who in the language of the act of con-
 gress had distinguished themselves by exceptionally meritoriouS service to the government in a duty of great responsibility"
 'In thus following the act of con- l gross authorizing three classes of
 medals" wrote the secretary ''honors
 less than the distinguished service
 medal should be awarded to officers l whohe shore duty was meritoriousj jbut 1 not of great responsibility
 T stated that the service worthy of l the highest distinction is that rem 1 dered afloat in the presence of the ! enemy and that the distinguished | service medal should be awarded to the captain of every ship struck by the mines or torDedoes of the enemy l if his conduct was meritorious in the i hour that tests courage and leader
 ship. I do not think the American | people can be persuaded to accept the idea that the distinguished service 1 medal. should not be given to the captain of a ship who bears himself courageously in the supreme hour for which all other hours in his naval ca : reer were but preparatory. if his ship is lost by submarine or mine attack i If this theory had been accepted in 1 former years Lawrence and Porter l and other naval heroes would have 1 been denied osne of the early honors | which their countrymen gladly gave
 them
 Ten commanding officers of ships f torpedced and sunk or put out of ac-
 tian were selected as worthy Nof re-
 reiving the distinguished service medal Theae awards, as stated in I nlT previous letter. were made without
 exception to every commanding officer l whose ship felt the blow of the enemy blow of the enemy except one who ! was courtmartialed and who. though | fully acquitted, has no recommenda- tion from any superior officer for rec
 ognition of any character. Admiral
 Wilson stated officially that the fail
 ure of Captain Hashrouck@to- return to
 his ship at daylight with a salvage
 party was an offenseN more serious than
 an error of judgment" However. be-
 cause of his previous service in the
 transportation of troops and without
 reference to his action after his shin
 was torpedoed. Captain Hasbrouck
 was selected by my direction for a \ naval cross the same as was dWdINeO to commanding officers of other trans
 ports Captain Hasbrouck writes he does not desire to accept this medal.
 
 i Nobody has suggested that an of i ficer should be honored- because his
 ship was sunk by a submarins. But
 it is clear that when a ship is sunk
 the commanding officer should be re-
 warded if he meets this supreme
 crisis with boise, with utter fearless
 ness with thought of his men above
 himself with the utilization of all those
 attributes that show q man Q hero when the hour strikes for his supreme
 trial If medals are not given for thi:
 sort of thing. what on earth are they , designed for?"
 Incorporated in the letter were tht records of all of the officers who los their vessels. including Commander D i W. Baglev, brother of Mrs. Daniels , and Commander Percy ". Foote, thu , secretary's personal aide, about whom z much of the controversy has centered , Tn Commander BagIev's case MT Daniels quoted from letter by Rea
 Admiral Sims which said:
 "Bagley's handling of the situation : after his ship was torpedoed was ev erything that I expected In the way o efficiency, good iudgment. courag : and chivalrous action.' 
 Lr0I HLAK MAY rE0E