AMERICA JOINS IN
I had foreseen that the battle to be fought on September 18th was the
last in which the First and Fourth Divisions could be called upon
to participate during the remainder of the 1918 campaigning season.
The wastage of their Battalions had gone on faster than the inflow
of fresh drafts, or the return of convalescent sick and wounded.
These two Divisions contained the original sixteen Battalions who had
immortalized themselves, in 1915, in the landing on Gallipoli. I was
strongly averse from disbanding any one of them to furnish drafts for
the remainder. My hope then was that, if these Divisions could be
allowed to rest over the winter, they could be sufficiently replenished
by the spring of 1919 to be able to maintain all sixteen Battalions at
a satisfactory fighting strength.
Of the remaining three Divisions, the Third and Fifth required at least
another week's rest; and I had promised the Second Division that after
their heroic efforts at Mont St. Quentin, they would not be again
called upon until towards the end of September. I would thus be left
with insufficient resources to maintain an immediate continuance of the
pressure upon the enemy.
On explaining the situation to General Rawlinson, he suggested the
interesting possibility of being able to obtain, very shortly, the
services of the Second American Corps of two Divisions, and asked me
whether I would be prepared to accept the responsibility of taking this
large force under my command for the continuance of the operations.
I had no reason to hesitate. My experience of the quality of the
American troops, both at the battle of Hamel and on the Chipilly spur,
had been eminently satisfactory. It was true that this new American
Corps had no previous battle service, but measures were possible to
supply them with any technical guidance which they might lack.
I therefore accepted the suggestion, and Rawlinson then asked me
to submit a proposal for a joint operation to take place towards
the end of the month by these two American and the remaining three
Australian Divisions, with the object of completing the task, so well
begun, of breaking through the Hindenburg defences. I was to propose
my objectives, to show how I intended to employ each of the five
Divisions, and also to set out my requirements in Artillery, Tanks and
other services.
It was anything but an easy task, and it had to be undertaken at a time
when the preparations for the battle of Hargicourt were uppermost in
my mind. Much time also had to be devoted to numerous distinguished
visitors.
The outcome was a letter to the Fourth Army which foreshadowed, almost
in its entirety, the battle plan which subsequently was actually
employed. The substance of this letter is here reproduced. The text has
been modified only by the omission of the reference letters to a large
coloured map which accompanied it:
Corps Headquarters,
18th September, 1918.
_Fourth Army._
1. I beg to submit the outlines of a plan for a series of
operations for the capture of the Hindenburg Line in the Sector
Bellicourt-Vendhuille, based upon the expectation that two American
Divisions will be available immediately to supplement this Corps.
2. The resources of the Corps in Infantry, which will be available,
are exclusive of the First and Fourth Australian Divisions,
although the Artillery, Technical Troops and Machine Gun Battalions
of those Divisions will continue to be available.
3. The plan is based upon the assumption that the objective Blue
Line of the operations of September 18th is in our possession all
along the Army Front, or can be seized in the very near future.
4. The accompanying Map shows the coloured lines referred to in the
following description, as also the reference letters in blue.
5. This plan is in outline only, and the various objective lines
and boundaries suggested are merely tentative, to form the basis
for a general plan.
6. The Blue Line is the line of eventual exploitation for the
operations of September 18th.
7. The present Corps front on the Blue Line extends a distance of
6,000 yards. It is suggested, either that the Corps front should be
extended to a total frontage of 10,000 yards, or that it should be
side-slipped northwards to a frontage of 6,000 yards. The latter
would obviously be preferable, so far as the Corps is concerned,
as enabling all its resources to be concentrated upon a smaller
frontage.
8. The major outlines of the plan are as follows:
(a) An attack by two American Divisions for the capture of the
Green Line.
(b) A subsequent attack by two Australian Divisions for the capture
of the Red Line.
(c) Exploitation by the Cavalry from the Red Line, in an Easterly
and north-easterly direction.
(d) A turning movement by the Ninth Corps, through Bellicourt
and Nauroy to turn the Canal defences, operating from north to
south--or alternatively.
(e) A turning movement by the Third Corps, operating through Le
Catelet northwards.
9. The details of the above plan will run on the following lines:
(a) The new Corps front to be taken over at the earliest possible
moment by two American Divisions, each Division deploying for this
purpose only one Regiment of one Brigade. This will place in Line
six Battalions on the Corps front, giving each Battalion about
1,000 yards. These troops will hold the line defensively, and
will, with the assistance of technical troops, prepare the battle
front.
(b) The battle troops of the two American Divisions will thus
comprise three Regiments or nine Battalions for each Division. The
allocation of objectives to these troops will be as follows:
(i) One Brigade (two Regiments) of the right Division to advance
4,500 yards on a frontage of 3,000 yards. This Brigade (six
Battalions) would attack with four Battalions in Line (750 yards
frontage each) and two Battalions in support for "mopping up"
duties. Its principal objective, apart from the main trench
systems, is Bellicourt.
(ii) Similarly, one Brigade (two Regiments) of the left Division,
with similar dispositions. Its principal objective, apart from the
main trench systems, is Catelet.
(iii) The odd Regiment of the right Division to be responsible for
forming the south defensive flank.
(iv) The odd Regiment of the left Division to be responsible for
forming the north defensive flank.
(c) It will be noted that the Green Line has been drawn so as to
include all ground giving good observation northward, eastward and
southwards, and to deny observation to the enemy. It is probable that
the Field Artillery barrage will not be able to penetrate to the
extreme limits of this proposed objective along the whole battle front
without moving forward some of the batteries, particularly in the
Northern Divisional Sector. This will probably necessitate a halt of
an hour or an hour and a half, to enable Artillery to be advanced.
(d) Assuming that the battle opens about 6 a.m., the Green Line should
be reached by 10 a.m. or earlier. By mobilizing ample resources in
technical troops, both American and Australian, and ample tools and
engineering material, it should be easily possible to construct not
less than four roads, sufficiently developed for horse transport, from
the Blue Line to the Green Line, by 2 p.m. These roads would be
located so as to make use of existing roads, and trench crossings
would be made by filling in with earth and not by bridging. It is
estimated, therefore, that Mobile Artillery could move forward not
later than 2 p.m. on Zero day.
(e) The Australian Infantry of two Divisions would move at such an hour
as would enable them to reach and be deployed upon the Green Line by 2
p.m., shortly after which hour they would be joined by the necessary
Mobile Artillery. This phase of the operation would also involve the
capture of the Beaurevoir Line. It is assumed that Tanks would be
available to deal with the crossing of the wire entanglements covering
this line.
(f) The completion of the defensive flanks would be allocated to
American troops.
(g) As soon as the Australian Infantry had passed the Green Line, the
four American Regiments who had participated in the capture of the
Green Line, would be concentrated, refitted and rested for operations
eastwards.
10. The following considerations should be kept in view, in connection
with this plan.
(a) There should be sufficient Field Artillery, not merely to
provide an effective barrage for the time-table advance to the
Green Line and its flanks, but also, in addition, sufficient
Mobile Field Artillery, not employed in the barrage, to enable the
Australian Infantry to be provided with at least six Artillery
Brigades for the exploitation phase of the operation.
(b) There should be at least 60 Tanks available for the first
phase, in order absolutely to guarantee the breaching of the main
Hindenburg trench systems. There should, in addition, be available
not less than 30 Tanks to assist the Australian Infantry through
the Beaurevoir Line.
11. There should be a systematic destructive bombardment of the
whole of the Hindenburg trench system on the battle front, lasting
at least four days, in order not merely to destroy the defensive
organization, but also to demoralize and starve the trench garrisons.
This destructive bombardment should extend a considerable distance to
the north and south of the battle front.
12. The rapid construction of usable roads, both for horse transport
and mechanical transport, across the Canal tunnel, would have to be a
special feature of the organization, so that the whole of our battle
organization could be rapidly carried forward to maintain the battle
eastward of the Red Line. This would involve the mobilization of a
large amount of mechanical transport, ready loaded with road-stone,
so that road-making can commence after Zero hour without any delay.
For these works, there would be available the greater part of the
Australian and American technical troops of seven Divisions, as well as
Army Troops Companies.
JOHN MONASH,
Lieut.-General.
Commanding Australian Corps.
Some comment is necessary upon this proposal. The composition of the
American Divisions, following the French and not the British precedent,
differed materially from my own Divisions. The American Division
consisted of two Brigades, each of two Regiments, each of three
Battalions. Its total strength was nearly double that of an English
Division.
It will be noted that my proposal involved a concentrated attack, not
upon the canal, but upon that sector of 6,000 yards which lay over the
Bellicourt-Catelet tunnel. This zone at that time lay clear of and to
the north of my Corps area, and that is what involved the necessity of
"side-slipping" the Corps front to the north.
[Illustration: Mont St. Quentin--Collecting Australian wounded under
the protection of the Red Cross flag, September 1st, 1918.]
[Illustration: An Ammunition Dump--established in Warfusee village on
August 8th, 1918, after its capture the same morning.]
Moreover, I put forward no suggestion that the Canal sector, then in
front of me, should be the subject of a frontal attack at all. My
proposal was that it should be taken by envelopment, through the breach
to be made over the tunnel. At the time I regarded it as unlikely that
the deep canal itself could be stormed except at great cost. I was not
prepared to commit any Australian troops under my command to such an
enterprise, and therefore naturally hesitated to propose that any other
Corps should attempt it. For this reason I submitted an alternative
plan of envelopment.
This was, however, a matter for the Army Commander to decide. My
business was merely to show that the proposed action of my own Corps
permitted of the co-operation of the other Corps of the Army in a
specified way.
General Rawlinson's decisions were given on September 19th, at a
conference which he assembled at my Headquarters. My plan for the
action of the Australian and American Corps was to be adopted in its
entirety, with the sole exception that the capture of the Beaurevoir
line, on the first day of battle, was not to be included in the plan.
It was to be left to await the results of the prior stages. In this
modification I could readily concur.
As regards the action of the flank Corps, General Rawlinson held the
view that a direct assault on the canal itself ought to be attempted,
and that this should be entrusted to the Ninth Corps. He was doubtless
influenced, in this view, by the knowledge, disclosed to us for the
first time on that day, that he intended to propose that the attack on
the Hindenburg Line would, if undertaken, extend over the front of at
least three Armies, the French on the south, and the Fourth and Third
British Armies. Such a simultaneous attack, over a very wide front,
would naturally increase the prospects of success for every Corps
participating.
As to the Third Corps, it was to take part only in the preliminaries of
the battle, and not in the battle itself. Another Corps, the Thirteenth
(Lieut.-General Sir T. L. N. Morland) was to join the Fourth Army.
If the Australian Corps succeeded in effecting the breach of the
Hindenburg Line as I had proposed to do, it was to be the Thirteenth
Corps, and not the Third Corps, which, pouring through the breach, was
to envelop the flank of the Hindenburg Line towards the north.
The main consideration that affected me was the approval of my plan for
the action of the two American and three Australian Divisions. I was
able to begin immediately the development in detail of that plan, a
task which proved at once the most arduous, the most responsible, and
the most difficult of any that I have had to undertake throughout the
whole of the war.
The first step was to get the American Divisions into the line opposite
their prospective battle fronts, and the next was to hand over what had
hitherto been the Australian Corps front to the Ninth Corps.
The Ninth Corps battle front was to extend from Bellenglise to
Bellicourt, mine from opposite Bellicourt to opposite Le Catelet.
The necessary troop movements and inter-divisional reliefs required
nearly a week for their completion. By the evening of September 23rd,
the last of the two Australian Divisions had been relieved by the
Americans and the Ninth Corps, and on that night these stood on their
respective battle frontages. I took over command of this new front,
thus manned by Americans, in the forenoon of September 25th.
It is a somewhat noteworthy circumstance, but one which attracted no
attention at the time, that between September 25th and September 29th,
there was a period of five days during which _no_ Australian troops
were in the front line in any part of the French theatre of war. This
was a situation which had never arisen since the first contingent of
Australians arrived from Egypt in April, 1916. For nearly two and
a half years, there had never previously been a moment when some
Australians had not been confronting the enemy, somewhere or other in
the long battle front in France.
I have said that I had been called upon to undertake the responsibility
of directing in a great battle two Divisions (the 27th and 30th) of
United States troops, numbering altogether some 50,000 men. These had
been organized into a Corps, called the Second American Corps, and
commanded by Major-General G. W. Read. It was certainly anomalous
that a whole organized Corps should pass under the orders of a Corps
Headquarters of another nationality, but in authorizing such an
arrangement, General Rawlinson relied upon the good sense and mutual
forbearance of the Corps Commanders concerned.
I am bound to say that the arrangement caused me no anxiety or
difficulty. General Read and his Staff most readily adapted themselves
to the situation. He established his Headquarters quite close to my
own, and gave me perfect freedom of action in dealing direct with his
two Divisional Commanders, so far as I found it necessary to do so.
Read was a man of sound common sense and clear judgment, a reserved but
agreeable and courteous personality. His only desire was the success of
his Divisions, and he very generously took upon himself the role of an
interested spectator, so that I might not be hampered in issuing orders
or instructions to his troops. At the same time, I am sure that in his
quiet, forceful way he did much to ensure on the part of his Divisional
Commanders and Brigadiers a sympathetic attitude towards me and the
demands I had to make upon them.
The Australian Corps had specialized in comprehensive and careful
preparations for battle. Its methods had been reduced to a quite
definite code of practice, with which every Staff Officer and Battalion
Adjutant had, by experience, become intimately familiar. All this
procedure was a closed book to the American troops, and they were
severely handicapped accordingly.
I therefore proposed to General Read, and he gratefully accepted, the
creation of an "Australian Mission" to his Corps, whose rôle would
be to act as a body of expert advisers on all questions of tactical
technique, and of supply and maintenance. This idea once accepted was
worked out on a fully elaborated scale.
To the head of this Mission I appointed Major-General Maclagan, not
only to command the personnel of the Mission itself, but also to live
with and act as adviser to General Read's own Staff. The Mission
comprised a total of 217 men, chosen from the First and Fourth
Australian Divisions, and consisted of specially selected and very
experienced officers and N.C.O.'s. The American Corps Headquarters
was provided with a Major-General, assisted by one General Staff, one
Administrative, one Signal, one Intelligence, and one Machine Gun
Staff Officer. Each American Division had assigned to it an Australian
Brigadier-General, assisted by several Staff Officers; each American
Brigade had an Australian Battalion Commander and Signal Officer; and
so on down the chain. Each American Battalion, even, had four highly
expert Warrant or Non-commissioned officers to advise on every detail
of supply, equipment and tactical employment of the troops.
By such an arrangement it became possible to talk to the whole American
Corps in our own technical language. This saved me and my Staff a vast
amount of time and energy, because the members of this Mission acted
as interpreters of the technical terms and usages customary in the
orders and maps of the Australian Corps, which were necessarily quite
unfamiliar to the American troops.
Maclagan was a man eminently fitted for this task. In appearance and in
temperament he is every inch a soldier. Of all my Divisional Commanders
he was the only one who, immediately before the war, was a professional
soldier of the Imperial Army. Although not Australian born, he was
whole-heartedly Australian, for he had spent some years as Director of
Military Training at the Royal Military College at Duntroon. On the
outbreak of war he received the command of the 3rd Australian Brigade,
and with it carried out the most difficult preliminary phase of the
landing on the Gallipoli peninsula. He commanded the Fourth Australian
Division from the autumn of 1917 until the conclusion of hostilities.
His characteristic attitude of mind, so strongly in contrast to that
of Rosenthal, was pessimistic. But that was not because he looked for
difficulties, but because he preferred squarely to recognize and face
all the difficulties there were. Yet he never failed in performance,
and invariably contrived to do what he had urged could not be done. One
could not afford to take him at his own modest estimate of himself.
Both he and his Division always bettered any promise they gave.
I entertain no kind of doubt that it was only because of the creation
of this Australian Mission to the Americans, and of Maclagan's tact,
industry and judgment in controlling it, that the combined action of
the two Corps in the great battle of the closing days of September
proved as successful as it did. Under no other conditions would it have
been possible to bring about any reasonable degree of co-operation
between two forces whose war experiences, outlook, attitude towards
their problems, training and temperament were so fundamentally
different.
It is not necessary to indulge in either a panegyric or a condemnation
of these American Divisions. Neither would be deserved or appropriate.
They showed a fine spirit, a keen desire to learn, magnificent
individual bravery, and splendid comradeship. But they were lacking in
war experience, in training, and in knowledge of technique. They had
not yet learned the virtues of unquestioning obedience, of punctuality,
of quick initiative, of anticipating the next action. They were, many
of them, unfamiliar with the weapons and instruments of fighting, with
the numerous kinds of explosive materials, or with the routine of
preparing and promulgating clear orders. They seriously underrated the
necessity for a well-organized system of supply, particularly of food
and water, to the battle troops. They hardly, as yet, appreciated the
tactical expedients available for reducing losses in battle.
Yet all these shortcomings were the results only of inexperience,
and it is perhaps unfair to contrast them with the Australian troops
who had seen front-line service in France for two and a half years
continuously, and whose leaders, high and low, had served a long and
graduated apprenticeship in every branch of their duties.
The Australian Mission assisted greatly to minimize these difficulties.
Although its members were vested with no executive powers, their advice
and help were eagerly sought, and zealously adopted. In many ways,
large and small, their assistance must have proved invaluable. How to
interpret orders from above and how to issue them to those below, how
to draw stores and how to distribute them, how to organize the signal
service and how to ensure a flow of information--these ranked among the
greater matters. In quite small things also, help was needed, such as
the way to detonate mortar bombs, to equip the infantryman for battle,
to organize and use the messenger (_i.e._, runner) service, and to keep
battle stations clear of people who had no urgent business there.
It is not, of course, intended to convey that all these defects were
present in every regiment. Some, however, were met with, by the
officers of the Australian Mission, in all of them.
It greatly added to the burden cast upon the American Divisions that
they were called upon to fight almost as soon as they had taken up duty
in the line. The necessity for this was really a legacy from the Third
Corps, whom they had relieved, and it is essential for an understanding
of the course of events during these days to narrate them in proper
chronological order.
I have explained that as the result of the battle of Hargicourt, the
Australian Corps had succeeded in mastering the whole of the Hindenburg
outpost line opposite its front, as far as a point a little north of
and opposite to Bellicourt. The advance of the Third Corps, however,
had failed to reach the same line, and had stopped short of it by an
average distance of nearly a thousand yards. On my pointing out that
the front I had taken over did not comply with the stipulations which I
had made in my battle plan,[21] the Army Commander decided that prior
to the main attack, the northern of the two American Divisions should
make good this shortage, by an attack aiming at the capture of the
remainder of the Hindenburg outpost line opposite the tunnel sector.
I must now anticipate an explanation of the main outlines of the plan
which I had prepared for the great battle, by a brief reference to the
situation and disposition of troops on September 25th. The two American
Divisions were respectively the 30th, commanded by Major-General Lewis,
on the right or south, and the 27th, commanded by Major-General O'Ryan,
on the left or north, each lying on a frontage of three thousand yards.
These two Divisions comprised, in all, eight regiments, each of three
battalions. I had instructed each of them to place one regiment in the
line, and to keep the remaining three, _i.e._, six in all, in reserve,
for the main operation.
My first Corps conference dealing with the forthcoming operations
was held at my Headquarters at Assevillers, on September 23rd. The
American Generals Read, Lewis and O'Ryan, with their respective Staffs,
attended, as also did the Australian Generals Maclagan, Brand and
Mackay, who were members of the Australian Mission to the American
Corps. None of the Australian Commanders destined to take part in the
operations attended on this day, for two reasons, firstly, because I
intended to confine myself entirely to that portion of the operation
which concerned the American troops only, and secondly, because the
date of the battle had not then been decided, and I wished to run no
risk of confusing executive action by any premature announcements to
the Australians, which subsequent events might modify.
The American rôle, had, however, sufficiently crystallized to enable
me to explain it to the assembled Generals in great detail. As
will subsequently appear, it was a plan which had, intentionally,
been reduced to the simplest possible elements. It was to be a
straightforward trench to trench attack, from a perfectly straight
"jumping off" line to a perfectly straight objective line, under a
dense Artillery and Machine-Gun barrage, and with the assistance of a
large contingent of Tanks.
The advance was to be at a deliberate pace, and if due regard were had
to a few elementary precautions, should prove a simple task for the
American Infantry. It was, indeed, on quite stereotyped lines, such as
had so often carried the Australian Infantry to victory in set-piece
battles such as Messines, Broodseinde, Hamel and the first phase of
August 8th.
It was, however, borne in upon me, very soon after this Conference
opened, that I was now confronted with quite a different proposition
from that to which I had been accustomed in the conferences attended by
my own Divisional Generals. The exposition of the plan itself was brief
and simple, but it elicited such a rain of questions, that in the end
I found myself compelled to embark upon a very detailed exposition of
the fundamental principles of my battle practice.
With blackboard and chalk, maps and diagrams, I had to speak for more
than three hours in an endeavour to explain methods and reasons,
mistakes and remedies, dangers and precautions, procedures and
expedients. The proceedings left me with no doubt that the American
Generals became fully informed as to the tasks and duties allotted to
them, and fully understood them.
In the light of after events, I am not so sure that they succeeded in
passing on the information to their subordinates--not by reason of any
shortcomings on their own part, for they impressed me as able, strong
men--but because their Divisions had not yet learned the methods and
machinery of effectively and rapidly conveying instructions to large
bodies of troops.
In one particular, subordinate though vital, there certainly was a
serious failure to reach the troops. The enemy had, during 1916, met
our assault tactics with an answer which proved disastrously effective
against us until we had learned how to meet it. He provided his trench
systems with many and roomy shell-proof dug-outs. Whenever our barrage
fell upon his trenches, his garrisons promptly took cover in these
dug-outs. When our assaulting infantry reached the enemy trenches they
found but few of the enemy there, and they rushed headlong forward to
the next objective trenches. From out of their dug-outs streamed the
enemy, faced about, attacked our assaulting lines in rear and withered
them with fire. Many an attack by the British on the Somme failed for
just such reasons.
In 1917 we evolved, and applied for the first time at the battle of
Messines, an effective answer to such tactics. Close on the heels of
our first line of assaulting troops came a second line, whose rôle
was to occupy the captured trench immediately, and to "mop it up."
This meant the killing or disarming of all enemy found in hiding, the
picketing of the entrances and exits of all dug-outs, and laying siege
to them until their occupants surrendered, a course to which they were
encouraged by a liberal use of phosphorus bombs or Mills's grenades.
This process of "mopping up" became an integral part of our attack
procedure. Australian infantry soon learned its importance, and
practised the method with a thoroughness and efficiency to which I
remember no exception. Even a junior sergeant commanding a dozen men
could be relied on to take all measures necessary to ensure that no
enemy was ever left in hiding and unguarded behind his little party as
they advanced.
In the forthcoming attack upon the Hindenburg defences, the process of
"mopping up" became of supreme importance, because of the very fact,
of which we had become well aware, that the whole defensive system
had been provided, on quite an exceptional scale, with underground
shelters, galleries, passages and dug-outs. I made the most of this
knowledge in my talks to the Americans, emphasized the dangers as
strongly as I was able, insisted that the "mopping up" organization of
their infantry must be absolutely perfected, and ordered that of the
total Infantry participating in the assault, not less than one-half
should have the special role of safeguarding all underground exits and
entrances.
The great fear was, of course, that these new troops, eager to show
their mettle, would be carried away in the excitement of the moment,
and would rush headlong forward, regardless of the dangers that
lurked behind them. It is, after all, no small demand to make upon
the discipline of an Infantry soldier, to expect him patiently and
obediently to stand guard over some dug-out entrance, allowing the
battle to sweep on, and his comrades to go forward to the excitement
and glory of achieving the final objectives.
So indeed it happened. The American Infantry had either not been
sufficiently tutored in this important matter, or the need of it had
not penetrated their understanding. In the attacks carried out by these
troops, while under my command, the "mopping up" was always badly done,
even in the few cases where it was attempted. The result was failure
to achieve a clean success, and a great addition to their own casualty
list. This criticism will be fully borne out by the narrative of the
great battle itself.
A second and much larger conference was held at my Headquarters on
September 26th, for the really complete and final co-ordination of the
whole of the procedure for the forthcoming battle. It was attended not
only by the American Divisional Generals and Brigadiers, but also by
the Commanders of the Second, Third and Fifth Australian Divisions,
their Staffs, the Tanks, Air Force and Cavalry.
It was much the largest and was also destined to be the last of any
assemblage of Commanders that it had been my privilege to call together
in the course of this memorable campaign.
No one present will soon forget the tense interest and confident
expectancy which characterized that meeting. America, a great
English-speaking democracy on one shore of the Pacific, was to
co-operate with Australia, its younger sister democracy on the opposite
shore, in what was the greatest and what might be the most decisive
battle of the great European War. Few present doubted that, if we were
successful, the war could not last much longer--because the loss of
the Hindenburg system would inevitably mean for the enemy his final
enforced withdrawal from France.
While the conference was in full swing, the Field Marshal himself paid
me a call. He had come to wish me success in the task before me. He was
interested to find so many Divisional Commanders assembled, and was
persuaded to address a few words to the gathering.
The conduct of the proceedings of this conference was a heavy strain.
The main battle was to take place on September 29th, or within
seventy-two hours, and part of my front line still stood a thousand
yards west of the Hindenburg outpost lines. General Rawlinson had
decided that this defect was to be made good prior to the main
operation, and the attempt to do so had been timed to take place on
September 27th, the day after the conference.
I had, therefore, to complete my organization upon the basis of a set
of precedent conditions which had not yet been entirely realized.
It was a new and a difficult situation. The whole of the powerful
Artillery at my disposal for the battle, amounting now to over a
thousand guns, was naturally clamouring for final decisions, so that
final barrage maps could be submitted for my approval, printed by my
very diligent and competent body of lithographic draughtsmen, and
circulated to all the batteries and Infantry.
To await the result of the operation of the next day would have allowed
insufficient time to complete the necessary maps and to distribute them
before nightfall on September 28th. There was no option but to assume
that General O'Ryan (27th American Division) would succeed in capturing
the northern section of the outpost line still in enemy hands, and upon
that assumption to fix the Artillery "start line" as falling to the
east of that objective. For the first time I had to gamble on a chance.
It was contrary to the policy which had governed all my previous battle
plans, in which _nothing_ had been left to chance.
At 5.30 a.m. next morning the 27th American Division carried out the
attack, under a barrage, and assisted by Tanks. The principal objective
points in the trench system under attack were Quennemont Farm and
Gillemont Farm. Every trace of these once prosperous homesteads and
plantations had, of course, long since disappeared. The names alone
remained as memories of the fighting there of 1917.
What happened on that day will never be accurately known. For once,
the information from the air did not harmonize with the claims made
on behalf of the assaulting troops, perhaps because the troops, being
untrained in the use of flares, or having been left unsupplied with
them, failed to assist the aeroplanes in identifying their correct
positions. However that may be, it became sufficiently clear, as the
day proceeded, that no proper success for the operation could be
claimed.
There remained no doubt that some enemy were still left in occupation
of trenches on our side of the objective for that day, and such
American troops as may have gained their objective could not therefore
be reached. It appeared afterwards that small parties of Americans
had reached the vicinity of their objectives and had very gallantly
maintained themselves there, although surrounded on all sides, until
relieved by the Australians on September 29th.
The non-success of this operation of September 27th appeared
undoubtedly to be due to a failure to carry out "mopping up" duties
satisfactorily. It considerably embarrassed the preparations for the
main attack on the 29th. The knowledge that a number of American
wounded were still lying out in front, and the suspicion that some of
the American troops had succeeded in reaching Gillemont Farm, precluded
any alteration of the Artillery plans for September 29th, even if there
had still been time to do so without creating untold confusion. To have
brought the Artillery start line, proposed for September 29th, back to
the start line of September 27th would have brought our own barrage
down upon these forward troops of ours.
I hastened to the Army Commander to put the position before him,
stating that I felt grave concern for the success of the main
operation, in view of the fact that my Artillery barrage would have to
come down fully a thousand yards in front of what was still the front
of the 27th Division. I suggested a postponement for a day to give this
Division, which had ample resources in troops, another opportunity
of retrieving the position. He explained, however, that it was now
too late to alter the programme, because three whole Armies were
committed to the date first appointed. He said that he was, under the
circumstances, quite prepared for a partial failure at this point, and
requested me to do my best to pursue the original plan, in spite of
this difficult situation.
He agreed, however, to my further request, that additional Tanks, out
of Army reserves, should be placed at my disposal, so that I might
allot them to the 27th Division, to assist them in passing over the
thousand yards which would bring them up level with the Artillery
barrage. I hoped that this would enable the Division to catch up with
the southern half of the battle line.
It was an unsatisfactory expedient, and gave no promise of certain
success. It proved futile, and gravely affected the actual course,
although not the ultimate success, of the battle still to come. It
was the only occasion in the campaign on which I was compelled to
accept preliminary arrangements which were not such as would absolutely
guarantee success.
The genesis of the difficulty thus created had, however, been the
failure of the Third Corps to complete their programme of September
18th. It had been confirmed by the subsequent failure of the 27th
American Division to make up the deficiency on September 27th. I still
think, as I then urged, that I should have been allowed to accept the
situation as I found it on taking over this front on September 25th,
and that the 27th Division should not have been called upon, at the
eleventh hour, to endeavour to establish that new situation which had
been originally assumed as the basis for the battle plan of September
29th. My original proposal of September 18th, in my letter of that
date, paragraph 3 (see above), had, of course, been made before I could
foresee that the Third Corps would fail to capture the start line
contemplated in my first plan.
Of course, all is well that ends well. But, for an anxious and
turbulent period of twenty-four hours on September 29th and 30th,
the issue of the battle hung in grave doubt. The operation, although
successful, did _not_ proceed "according to plan" in its entirety, and
it was due to the wonderful gallantry and skilful leading of the Third
Australian Division that a very ugly situation was retrieved, a result
to which the Fifth Australian Division also contributed in no small
degree.
FOOTNOTES:
[21] See paragraph 3 of same.