Arizona republican., 1920-03-08
REPORTS ON NAVY AWARD
 WRANGLE GIVEN

Three C. O. P. Members
 Join in Majority Report,
 In Which They Sharply
 Criticise Daniels-Demo
 cratic Members Submit
 Individual Reports
 WASHINGTON, March :. - The wrangle over awards to navy officers of war decorati tions drew nearer con clusion tonight when Chairman Page of the senate naval committee made public the trio of reports the inveSti- gators of the subcommittee produced.
 The three republican members joined in the majority report, which sharply criticised Secretary Daniels in some respects, while the two democrats submitted individual reports defending the secretary's course and directing their attack, in turn. at Rear Admiral William $. Sims. the most prominent figure in the controversy stirred up over navy medals and crosses.
 Naval Morale Unaffected
 In one respect the three reports are unique They are agreed on two points: That no permanent harm has come to naval morale q result of the awards or the controversy and that enlisted men received too small share of recognition for their services.
 The majority report. signed by Sen ators Hale. Mccormick and Poindex- ter. arraiSns Mir. Daniels for not hay ing fully advised officers 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 inves- tigafion as tempest in a teapot, 'too ridiculous to be mentioned in connec- tion with the morale of fighting navy. In the second report, Senator Trammen asserted that MT. Daniels followed established naval custom in changing recommendations of his sub ordinates, as those officers themselves had done with proposals of their jun iors.
 The Majority Report
 The majority report reached the following conclusions:
 That Secretary Daniels did not make known to the service his policy as to awards. especially with regard to 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 recom- mended honors the relative order of merit and did not himself give suf- hcient consideration to that question. injury to morale and depreciation of the value of awards resulting.
 That Secretary Daniels did not re- quire q sufficiently high standard of meritorious conduct in conferring honors on officers who lost ships, and was more zealouS to further the in- terests of commanders who lost ships than of other commanders who, in- stead of losing their ships, destroyed TSl T lan chi enemy
 Would Amend Award Statute
 That the statute governing naval awards should be amended 10 avoid further controversy
 In referring to charges as to lack Of full cooperation with the allied ad- miralties made by Admiral Sims, the report said that they were not at this time within the province of the com mittee
 The majority report laid stress on it's statement that no attempt had been made to ascertain the order Of merit among those recommended for decorations. This was most unfor- tunate. 1t added, and the signers be- iieved commanding officers were best able to guage relative merit.
 Had such policy prevailed" it continued. the sub- committee is of the opinion that the men most en- titled to awards would have received them"
 Believes Probe Unnecessary.
 Senator Pittman contended the in vestigation was unnecessary because the naval award matter vas being re- investigated by the Knight board by direction of Secretary Daniels when the Investigating committee was ap- pointed.
 Like most congressional investi- gations of a similar character, he said, it had hanpfiCial
 The hearing of the personal griev- ances of an admiral and giving pub licity to critical and depreciatory statements made by the admiral with regard to the accomplishment of the navy during the war tended to be- Smirch d glory never before ques- toned" Senator Pittman said.
 Admiral Sims, believed, the senator 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 award ing it to junior officers and enlisted men.
 Justifies Award to Baeiey.
 Criticising Admiral Sims for hay ing made special point of alleged injustice to six members of his staff, Senator Pittman declared that the award of a distinguished service medal 10 Commander D. W. Bagley, Secre tary Daniels brother-in law. about whom much of the controversy cen tered. was justified. The senator also assailed Admiral Sims conduct be- fore the committee, which he said would lead civilians to believe that the officers were more deeply impressed with. British ideas. customs and man ners. than with those of his own country
 Senator Trammel1. democrat Flor ida, in a separate report said that Sec 1l,o ,crfv, mendation made by commanding of ficers and the Knight board. was fol- lowing established naval custom and the same policy was pursued by Ad- niral sims with regard to reeommen- dations.