The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1920-01-17
ADMIRAL sims DEFENDS ACTION
In CRITICIZING NAVAL AWARDS
BEFORE INVESTIGATING BOARD
Declares Navy Is Under Handi-
cap Because it Lacks Con-
Structive Criticism.
WOULD LIFT CENSORSHIP
Also Believes Commanding Of
ficer Only One Who Knows
a Mans Real Value.

! Washington, Jan. 16.-Rear Adj
miral William s. Sims. whose letter
/ to Secretary Daniels recently deolin-
! ing the distinguished service medal
awarded him. precipitated the contro-
versy over the award OF naval war
time honors, was the first witness on
the list of those to appear before the
senate sub committee today.
Declaring that the greatest handi-
cap Of the American navy was the
. lack of constructive criticism and the
fact that naval officers We're refused
| permission to publish any matter with
out first submitting it 70 the navy
| department, Rear Admiral Sims told
the senate committee investigating
naval decorations that his criticism of
the circumstances OF some of the
awards was a plain duty.
| 1t did not involve INSTRUMENTATION. a 5
some newspapers had seemed to as
sumo. he said. nor was there any in
tention TO make personal attack
upon the secretary
Opening the hearing, Chairman Hale
| said congress intended that the
award of honors won by naval Off
/ GERS and men in time OF war should
/ be beyond the influence OF friend
ship. patronage or politics but that
! there was a feeling over the country
the intent Of congress had been vio-
lated.
The purpose of the committees in
vestigation was summed up by the
| chairman as follows: ITO throw full
/ light Of publicity on any person or
persons responsible for lowering the
value Of naval wartime decorations to
the recipients and thus lowering the
morale of the navy by allowing friend
/ ship or politics to influence such
awards and TO obtain full vindication
OF any persons who might have been
placed in a false light before the pub
I lie as the result of recent charges.
Senator Pittman. democrat. OF Ne
vada, charged the committee with dis
couretsy to Secretary Daniels in call
i ing Admiral Sims a subordinate Off
Ger before hearing Secretary Daniels
the man who is virtually on trial
ihere' He said Mr.. Daniels was re-
i sponsible for the awards and should
be heard first.
| Chairman Hale said that no dis
scourtesy was intended to the secre-
Itary but that it was thought best TO
first call Admiral Sims. who made the
principal charges in the controversy.
! Asked If Secretary Daniels had been
! invited TO appear first the chairman
! said ne had not. but added he would
; be given an opportunity To testify
later. Senator Pittman then asked
unanimous consent to have Secretary
Daniels called before proceeding fur
ther but Chairman Hale objected.
Senator Pittman then demanded a
/ roll call on a formal motion. which
was lost by vote OF to ?.
/ A motion by Senator Pittman that
/ Secretary Daniels be called as soon
as Rear Admiral Sims finished his
testimony also was defeated.
on taking the stand Admiral Sims
said he had received a reply to his
letter to Mr. Daniels criticizing the
methods of making the naval awards:
that the reply was personal and sim
lply said no final action on the awards
had been made.
Admiral Sims then read prepared
statement in which he said some news
/ papers had been mistaken in
/ cribing personal motives TO some of
/ those who had criticised the awards
and in assuming that advantage was
| taken of the incident to make a per
sonaI attack on the secretary.
/ Nothing could be further from the
truth, he said. adding that in prob
tabIy the nearly unanimous opinion Of
officers Of the navy, certain mis-
takes were made in the awards which
/ involved not only the question of jus
| tice but the morale Of the fighting
force.
Assuring the existence of these
/ convictions on the part of the naval
| officers" Admiral Sims continued, "it
| is apparent that it is the duty at least
/ OF those who exercised, or have exer-
cised.. command of the officers the ad-
visibility Of whose decorations is in
question, officially to present their
criticisms and suggestions IN accord
ance with the authorization prescribed
for such cases by the regulation issued
| by the navy department.
The making OF such criticism is
therefore, not only a duty that the Of
| ffcers indicated owe their service, but
| it is perfectly legal and perfectly
proper and does not involve, such as
some press comments have stated or
/ implied, any flavor Of insubordina-
ton.
'sOur navy lacks constructive crit
icism from the public-and necessa-
rily so because our naval officers are
| forbidden TO publish anything with
Tout the permission OF, and usually cen
lsorship By the department. This is 70
say the least, a singular regulation
mo. 2-continued on Page Two.1