History will concern itself as nearly as possible with _facts_.
Relative to the World War the world believes and will believe what
is stated by those who were in supreme authority and by those whose
business it is dispassionately--mercilessly to ascertain and state the
truth. Statements or accounts to the contrary, or that do not coincide,
are merely ridiculous and can not stand.
Commonplace, every-day occurrences, occurrences that had no unusual
bearing on anything of special importance, occurrences that were not
exceptional, feats that were not particularly noteworthy from the
standpoint of things as a whole, attempts that were not successful
or were only partly successful--or if they cannot be logically and
adequately proved--no matter how tremendous and how commendable they
may be and may seem to those directly concerned--do not interest or
convince very many, certainly not the general public--even now, and, of
course, never will.
All accounts of American colored soldiers in France lay much stress
on the Ninety-second Division’s attack, just preceding the armistice,
on the defenses of Metz--conceded to be the most impregnable inland
fortress or position in the world. To attack the world’s strongest
fortress _means_ something, and if you attain any actual, clear cut,
unquestionable success, and if the world knows about it, it means a
great deal. Especially in a Democracy is public opinion of importance.
At the time this attack was launched, namely, the morning of November
10th, 1918, the Division had had sufficient experience in the line and
was sufficiently well organized and equipped to be taken seriously
as a combat Division. But, unfortunately, our activities against the
defenses and under the guns of Metz, coming, as they did, immediately
preceding the cessation of hostilities, a time when so much of interest
and importance was transpiring, received little if any general
publicity.
But, imagine my state of mind, having made a lecture to two colored
audiences and having told my white friends about the wonderful
accomplishments of my Colored Battalion, when I read an Associated
Press article sent out from Washington which contained a paragraph in
a letter credited to General John J. Pershing, which read as follows:
“The Ninety-second Division, astride the Moselle, attacked at 7 a. m.,
November 10th and at 5 a. m., November 11th, advanced a short distance,
but the troops had retired to cover in the face of repeated heavy fire
when the commander of the attacking Brigade received information at
7:18 a. m. that an armistice would be effective....” etc.
My friends or any one’s friends reading or hearing of this statement
credited to the Commander-in-chief of the American Expeditionary Forces
would believe that the colored soldiers of the Ninety-second Division
(the only complete colored combat division) had _attempted_ something
against the fortifications of Metz but that they had _FAILED_!
It made Bois Frehaut a hoax. It made me a liar. It made any
colored citizen a laughing stock who spoke of the great deeds and
_accomplishments_ of colored soldiers under the guns of Metz.
Generalizations, even if authentic, are not _convincing_. Sweeping
summaries about units differently engaged at different times and
places change few opinions. Something specific, complete in itself,
_satisfactorily provable to the skeptical_ must be shown, so it seemed
up to me to secure and to preserve for the American colored soldier and
for the American Negro, the credit for a most exceptional and glorious
_achievement_. Immediately I wrote to a member of Congress, Hon. Will
R. Wood, sent the extract from the Indianapolis Sunday Star of January
11th, 1920, and also the facts about the Ninety-second Division’s drive
toward Metz.
After General Pershing had returned to Washington, following his
tour of inspection, and had had the records fully looked into he
wrote a letter to Mr. Wood dated March 1st, 1920. Mr. Wood sent the
letter to me. General Pershing said that the paragraph as published
was incorrect--that what he actually said in his letter was: “The
Ninety-second Division, astride the Moselle attacked at 7 a. m.,
November 10th, and at 5 a. m., November 11th, renewed the attack. The
renewed attack started at 5 a. m., November 11th advanced a short
distance, but the troops had retired to cover in the face of reported
heavy fire....” etc.
Even this statement, while perfectly true as to the attempts to advance
on November 11th, gives a general impression of failure on the part of
the Division in its advance toward Metz. It does not, however, make it
impossible or untrue that the key position, Bois Frehaut, was captured
in its entirety on the 10th and _continuously held_ until the armistice
went into effect. The holding was really of more importance than the
capturing. The orders were “capture and hold” and great emphasis was
laid on the “hold.” But General Pershing goes on most fully and justly,
as you will note, to state and show that the Second Battalion of the
Three Hundred and Sixty-fifth Infantry did _take_ and did _hold_ the
Bois Frehaut, and that _this Battalion fully accomplished_ its mission.
The General’s letter was published as part of an article, under the
heading, “Pershing Sends Correct Report,” in the Indianapolis Star of
March 9th, 1920. It was also copied in other papers. The letter in full
follows: