The Prince George's enquirer and southern Maryland advertiser. (Upper Marlborough, Md.) 1882-1925, 1920-01-30
DANIELS DIDN'T
SLUR BRITISH
But Chief of Operations Is Ex-
pected to Figure Prominently
in Controversy Now Brewing.
FULL INQUIRY TO BE HELD.
conoress to Demand Name OF Mar
Who Warned "Beware of England"
Whole Conduct of Navy to Be
Thrashed Out.

Washington.- Daniels mas
written to Senator Page OF vermont
chairman of the Senate Naval Aftalrs
Committee, letter in which he denies
that he was the official in the navy de-
partment who, as alleged by Admlral
Sims in his testimony before that COM
mittee, orally instructed him not TO let
the British "pull the WOOL over MS
ewes when he went to London, ana tnat
we would as soon fight the British as
the Germans"
This denial from Secretary Daniels
would seem to eliminate one high OIL
cial of the government from those who
would be in a position to give any in
structions to Admiral Sims just before
ne left Washington for London In
March, 1917.
In the navy department itself the
aext responsible official in position to
give instructions, written or oral, to
Admiral Sims at the beginning Of SUCH
a mission would be the chief of naval
operations. At the time Admiral Sims
went abroad Admiral William S. Ben
son was chief of naval operations, and
as such conferred with Admiral Sims
lust before he left Washington. Sec
retary Daniels denial in his letter to
Senator Page is regarded as rather
leaving it up to Admiral Benson to ex-
plain whether he was the man who
made the statement to Admiral Sims.
The sensational arraignment of the
policy and conduct Of the navy depart
ment during the war contained in the
letter which Admiral Sims wrote to
Secretary Daniels on January Z and
was read by the admiral before a SEN
ate subcomi inittee will result in a COM
plete investigation of the conduct OF
the navy department during the great
conflict
Admiral Sims charged that grave er'
rors were committed by those in
charge of the administration Of the
navy; that these were in violation OF
fundamental military principles; that
he was not properly provided with a
staff while in London; that his rec.
lamentations were turned down when
he asked for the dispatch Of naval
units, or that the ships he sought were
greatly delayed in being furnished and
cited what he regarded as eleven spe'
cific instances of incompetence.
The most profound surprise was ere
ated when Admiral Sims read that por'
ton of his letter in which he charged
that, on leaving Washington for Lon
don just before the American declara.
ton of war against Germany was
adopted by Congress, he was told by O
person in authority in the navy depart
ment that he should not "let the Brit
lsh pull the wool over your eyes," and
that 1--WE would as soon fight the Brit
ish as the Germans"
Secretary Daniels, who had admins
trative control over the navy depart
men during the war, and Admiral VIII
liam S. Benson, who was chief Of naval
operations throughout the war, fully
realize that they will have an oppor
tunity to state their side of the case
to the congressional investigating com
mittee, and that they preferred not tc
answer Admiral Sims until they tool
the witness stand at the capital.
Admiral Benson would not say
whether he l:new who had given sucf
instructions as those quoted
There is every indication that the
sensational testimony given by Ad
miral Sims has brought the American
navy to the threshold of another con
troversy that will rank with the ia
nous Decatur-Barron row that follow
ed the exploits of the American navy
in the Tripolitan War, and the Schley
Samson controversy which followed
the Spanish-American War, and tha
the principals in the new controvers!
will be Admiral Sims and Admira
| Benson.
Admiral Sims letter is q CAREFUL,
| prepared arraignment of the Who'll,
| conduct Of the war from the nava
point of view.