The Birmingham age-herald., 1921-07-18
CHAPTER
 OF DAN|ELS-SIMS
 ROW IS WRITTEN
Republican and Democratic Reports Conflict Widely Re- garding Navy Direction
 in Early Months of War
By Associated Press

Washington, July I7.-Widely con- flicting views regarding direction of the American navy dlring the carly months of the war were detailed in republican and democratic reports made public today, of the senate naval committees h ~>stigation of controversies between former Secre- tary Daniels and Rear Admiral Will liam s. Sims. The reports constitute the last chapter in the famous Sims Daniels controversy of May, 1920, caused by Rear Admiral Sims letter sharply criticislng the Daniels war admin nistration.
 Mir. Daniels, former Prt sident Will son and Rear Admiral W. $. Benson, former chief of operations, were scored severely in the majority res publican report, which charged many slns of omission and commission in naval war derection. These officials were as stoutly defended and as highly praised in the minority domo7 cratic report. Admiral sims was com mended by the majority and assailed by the minority.
 Abuse and Praise
 self defensive, n-aggressiVe and non helpful policy" was imputed to the democratic administration by the majority report. which also charged many serious delays In navy operations resulted. The minority found that uniform success Of our operations amply demonstrated the wisdom of the policies adopted and the plans carried out by the navy de- partment, "and instead of censure or criticism. the department, as well as the service, deserves the hearty com mendation of this committee and or the American people"
 Senators Hale of Maine, Ball Of Delaware and Reyes of New Hamp- shire signed the republican majority report and Senators Pittman of Ne vada and Trammell of Florida the democratic minority. Each report makes a separate volume embracing detailed review from scores of wit nesses during testimony in the naval
 
 1920.
 The recommendations were made by the majority were for appoint : ment of a professional commission or naval officers to study and apply to the American navy lessons of the World war, and for presidential commission including civilians lo | study and recommend reforms n | navy organization. No, recommends | the minority. Result of Sims Letter | The investigation resulted from reading by Admiral Sims during cofn- mittee inquiry more than year ago into his controversy with MT. Danieis | over naval awards of distinguished l service decorations, of ms letter IF MT. Daniels, written January ', lszu' charging the navy department Wltn numerous delays and derelictions m | directing naval warfare. Many spec fife recommendation for future navy acceptances as lessons of the war were made by Admiral Sims, wno was in chief command of naval oper ations overseas during the war. Support was given by the ma iority report to many Of Aomlrdi sims charges. The minority assert ed that none of the charges tnat seemed at all serious were justified  ported by the facts presented nor concurred in in the opinions or navai officers who appeared before the sub committee"
 Admiral sims principal charge, that administrative delays were es timated to have cost 50O,00O lives anu SIS 900 .0O0, 900 unnecessarily, was discussed in both reports.
 "The conclusion seems ineVitapie | IaIa in ations not occurred, the American orneditionary forces might nave brought about an allied victory ear- Her than they actually did" said the | ma iority report, but the extent to which these delays failed to shorten the war is altogether conjecturai'
 Hold Charges Unfounded The minority report described tne Sims charge as "monstrous anu
 "without foundation, ana auueu'
 Admiral Sims failed apsoiuteis o
 produce any evidence 10 sus.alh s.'
 sar,ous charge. The evidence snowsu Sa,,ond shadow of doubt that the
 army was transported abroad as idst as if was ready. that the submarines did not sink our transports, ana tnat ,,unitions and supplies for our army cro.sed the water in ample volufhe a' all times. ,ta h,, th.
 Chief strictures were laid oy ine
 n,ioritv against the former admln- iatration for alleged failure 10 pre pare for war and for alleged lack %, Q, an an aggressive policy, both of wnlSn rsa
 ',are denied by the minority. :
 majority emphasized, however tnas @ its criticisms of navy administ 'oi'
 were confined to the periods prloI eo l 1918. declaring that thereafter naval war was carried on Tn sucn .
 way as to reflect most creoi tsply ols the navy department as wen l the navy and similarly ,hst tha entire point of view expressed py Secretary Daniels on naval matters | changed from that of an oille'a .a..nt he eknre and during lSl