Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1920-03-08
SEC Y. DANIELS
HELD To BLAME
IN NAVY MEDAL
AWARD QUARREL
Three Reports Rendered By
Investigating Committee,
None of Which Complete
Iy EXonerateS Naval Chief
SECRECY OF POLICY
CAUSE OF FRICTION
Lack of Understanding Be-
tween Cabinet Official and
Commanding Officers Re-
SpOnSibIe for Row,
10y Morning JOURNAL sp.c,AL LEASED wrssi

Icy MORNING JOURNAL sPsc'AL LEASED WIsHl
Washington, March 7. - The
wrangle over awards 10 navy Off
GERS of war decorations drew near
er to a conclusion tonight, when
Chairman Page of the senate naval
committee made public the trio of
reports the Investigators of the sub
committee produced.
The three republican members
Joined in the minority report, which
sharply criticised Secretary Danes
in some respects, while the TWO
! democrats submitted individua
reports defending the secretary
course and directing their attack,
in turn, at Rear Admiral William ).
Sims, the most prominent figure III
| the controversy stirred up over
navy medals and crosses.
In one respect the three reports
are unique. They are agreed on
two points. that no paramount
harm has come to naval morale as
result of the awards or the con-
troversy that enlisted men re-
milton for their services.
The majority report, signed by
Senator'S Hale, Mccormick ana
PoindeXter, arraigns Mr.. Daniels
for not having fully advised Off
GERS as to his plans in making
awards and asserts that his policy
of decorating officers who lost ships
was detrimental to the navy.
Senator Pittman, in the first mi
nority report, characterized the in
vestgation as a tempest in a tea
pot "too ridiculous to be mentioned
with the morale of fighting
navy" In the second minority re-
port Senator Trammell asserted
that Mr.. Daniels followed estab-
lished naval custom in changing
recommendation of his subordt-
mates as those officers themselves
had. done with proposals of their
juniors.
The majority report reached the
following conclusions:
That Secretary Daniels did not
make known to the service his pol
icy as to awards, especially with
regard to the relative Importance
of duty on shore and afloat. Fewer
changes would have been necessary
later, had he done so, the report
said.
That the secretary did not ascer-
tain from the officers who recon-
mended honors, the relative order
of merit and did not himself give
sufficient consideration to that
question, injury to morale and de-
probation of the awards resulting.
That Secretary Daniels did not
require a sufficiently high standard
of meritorious conduct in confer
ring honors on officers who lost
ships and was "more jealous toI
further interests of commanders
who lost ships than of other COM
manders who, instead of losing
their ships, destroyed, or seriously
damaged the ships of the enemy
That the statute governing nava
awards should be amended to- avoid
further controversy.
In referring to charges as to lack
of full cooperation with the allied
admirals made by Admiral Sims,
the report said that they were not
at this time within the province of
the committee.
The majority report laid stress
on its statement that no attempt
had been made to ascertain the
order of merit among those rec
commended for decorations. This
was most unfortunate it added, |
and the signers believed command 4,
ing officers were best able TO
gauge relative merit.
"tIad such a policy prevailed" It !
continued, "the subcommittee is of
the opinion that the men most en-
titled to awards would have re-
ceived them"
Senator Pittman contended that
the investigation was unnecessary
because the naval award matter
was being re-investigated by the
knight board by direction of Sec
retary Daniels when the investi-
eating committee was appointed.
Like most congressional in
.vestigations Of similar charac-
ter" he said. ''it served no bene-
fetal purpose"
The airing of the personal griev-
ances of an admiral and giving
publicity to critical and deprecia-
tory statements made by the ad-
n,iral with regard to the accom-
plishments of the navy during the
war tended to besmirch a glory |
never before questioned, Senator
pittman said.
Admiral Sims believed. the sem
ator said, that the distinguished
service medal should only be
awarded to a 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 hav-
ing made a special point of al |
legged injustice to, six members of
his staff, Senator Pittman declared |
that the award of a distinguished
service medal to Commander d. |
w. Bagley. Secretary Daniels
brother law, about whom much |
of the controversy centered, was
justified. The senator also as
sailed Admiral Sims conduct be-
fore the committee, which he said |
would lead civilians to believe that
the officer was more deeply i'm
pressed with British ideas, customs |
and manners. than with those of
his own country"
Senator Trammel. democrat |
Florida, in a separate report said |
that Secretary Daniels in changing
recommendations made by com
CONTINUED on PAGE Twol :.