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:

American Expeditionary Forces

Office of the Commander-in-Chief

March 1, 1920.

My dear Mr. Wood:

I regret that my absence from Washington has delayed this reply to your letter of January 17th enclosing a letter of January 12th from Major Ross.

Major Ross quotes a paragraph from a letter written by me as published in the “Indianapolis Star” and objects to this paragraph as unjust in so far as his battalion (2nd Battalion, 365th Infantry) is concerned. As quoted by Major Ross the paragraph to which he objects reads as follows:

“The 92nd 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 at 11 a. m. The Brigade Commander reports that he ordered all firing stopped by 10:45 a. m. and that the firing was so stopped.”

The above quotation is incorrect. The paragraph as actually written in my letter of November 21st was as follows:

“The 92nd 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 when the commander of the attacking Brigade received information at 7:18 a. m. that an armistice would be effective at 11 a. m. The Brigade Commander reports that he ordered all firing stopped by 10:45 a. m. and that the firing was so stopped.”

You will note that in the correct paragraph the reference to the retirement of troops relates solely to the renewed attack started at 5 a. m., November 11th and does not concern the attack of November 10th. I think a careful examination of Major Ross’s letter shows that his statements as to the work of his battalion do not assert that any advance was made by the 2nd Battalion on November 11th. Examination of the records shows that the 2nd Battalion did take the Bois Frehaut on November 10th and that this battalion held this position until the armistice went into effect.

The orders issued by the 183rd Brigade on the evening of November 10th for the operation of November 11th contemplated putting the 1st Battalion of the 365th into position in the western part of Bois Frehaut and—“the 2nd Battalion, 365th Infantry will be held in support in its present position in the Bois Frehaut.” This clearly shows that the 2nd Battalion, 365th Infantry, was not expected to attack on November 11th; and taken with other evidence shows that the 2nd Battalion, 365th Infantry, held, on November 11th, the positions which it had gained on November 10th.

The actual statements made by me in my letter of November 21st were correct, based on the reports of the several commanders, and I think that Major Ross will agree that there is nothing in what I have said that reflects in any way upon the work of the 2nd Battalion, 365th Infantry. That battalion appears to have done what was expected of it on November 10th and on November 11th. As shown in the quotation I have given above from the order issued November 10th for the operation of November 11th, the 2nd Battalion was in support and was not in the attacking line on the morning of November 11th.

I am enclosing herewith the papers enclosed with your letter of January 17th.

Very sincerely,
(Signed) John J. Pershing.

The Honorable Will R. Wood,
House of Representatives,
Washington, D. C.

In view of the general opinion prevailing among American forces in France, and the impression of the American public at large relative to the Ninety-second Division’s drive toward Metz also relative to its experience in the Argonne as represented by the Three Hundred and Sixty-eighth Infantry in the attacking line, it seemed to me advisable to state what the result was of work done by attacking units, other than the Second Battalion of the Three Hundred and Sixty-fifth Infantry, in the advance on Metz fortifications on November 10th and 11th. It is especially well that I mentioned them since General Pershing says in effect (and the General knows and is regarded as an authority) that the Second Battalion, Three Hundred and Sixty-fifth Infantry fully accomplished its mission, and also that attacks made on the 11th “advanced a short distance, but had retired to cover....”

No doubt, before reading my lecture, some were of the opinion that the Ninety-second Division was rushing with irresistible force past and over strong points, regardless of all defenses, sweeping all before it and was only prevented from battering down the walls of the city of Metz itself by the armistice. As nearly every soldier, from General Pershing down, knows and as the final battle line as compared with the line on November 9th clearly proves, such was not the case. Had I indulged in glittering generalities to that effect, had I even inferred it, or had I left an impression that all units concerned, accomplished their missions, that is, succeeded in carrying out their orders, I would lay myself open to serious and just criticism, for as leader of the attack on the key position, which was the central position, it was my business to know what happened on my front and on my flanks. I would be considered untruthful or at least an exaggerator, and all that I have said, if it has any effect at all, would detract from rather than add to the credit due the American colored soldier.

“Scott’s Official History of the American Negro in the World War,” written and compiled by Emmett J. Scott, special assistant to the Secretary of War, contains the general reports, less appendices and details, of the Commander of the Ninety-second Division and of the Commander of the One Hundred and Eighty-third Brigade relative to operations of November 10th and 11th. For your convenience I shall cite pages in Dr. Scott’s work.

I said something to the effect that the battalion of the white division on the left of the 367th’s front attacked, lost about 156 men in a few minutes and retired. I also said that the 367th Infantry on our left—just across the Moselle failed to accomplish its mission.

Page 151, Brigade Report, “At 10:30 a. m. a message from the Division was received that the attack of the 367th Infantry, 184th Brigade had been repulsed (on our left), but that two companies were being sent forward to reinforce their attack.”

Page 159, Division Report, “10 Nov. 9:30 hr.—Attack by 367th Infantry west of Moselle not prosecuted because of failure of 56th Infantry, 7th Division, to capture Preny. The report of the C. O., 367th Infantry at pages 2 and 3 shows the facts and reasons.”

Page 160, Division report, “Inasmuch as the 367th Infantry west of the Moselle made no advance due to the fact that it was necessary that the 7th Division should first capture Preny before an advance was practicable, no report is made here of enemy units engaged west of the Moselle.”

That, I take it, is enough to prove that no success was achieved by units advancing or to advance on our left. It is necessary to prove that for the benefit of only a very few, for the overwhelming majority of Americans (owing to the effort to give all units equal credit and imply that all concerned succeeded) are ignorant, or seriously in doubt whether the 92nd Division or any of its units achieved any real success anywhere.

Now let us see about our brigade—the 183rd, which comprised the 365th and 366th infantry and the 350th Machine Gun Battalion. The Brigade report says, latter part of paragraph 2 on page 149, same book, “The object of this attack was to capture and hold the Boise Frehaut and the Bois Voivrotte (Bois Voivrotte is the name of the small wood I spoke of in the lecture, to our right) with the object of advancing the line of observation of the Marbache sector to the northern boundary of these woods.” So our brigade orders were to capture and hold these two woods, and, as we were advancing from the south, the line we were to hold respectively, was the northern boundary of both these woods.

Page 149, paragraph 3 of Brigade report: “The attack was to be made on the Bois Frehaut by the 2nd Bn. 365th Inf., Major Warner A. Ross, commanding. The attack on the Bois Voivrotte was to be made by two platoons, 2nd Bn. 366th Inf. At the zero,” etc.

At the early hour of 8:12, the report says, page 150, a message had been relayed from Division headquarters to Brigade headquarters to the effect that Bois Voivrotte was completely occupied. It was very small compared to the positions the 2nd Bn. 365th Inf. was attacking. And the next entry, as given on page 150, is: “At 9 a. m. a message was received that sharp fighting by machine guns was going on in the Bois Voivrotte and the Bois Frehaut.” This was the case in Bois Frehaut at that time and at 8:30 when I sent that particular message relative to Bois Frehaut by pigeon. Now, the fact that machine gun fighting was going on in Bois Voivrotte means that either the 8:12 message about it being completely occupied was premature or that machine guns had been sent in by the enemy after the platoons of the 2nd Bn. 366th Inf. “completely occupied” it. For if enemy machine gunners were occupying and fighting in the wood it could not be said to be “completely occupied” by our troops.

After the 2nd Battalion, 365th Infantry had completely occupied Bois Frehaut and established our line along the northern boundary and also the eastern boundary of that wood (it was much farther north than the northern boundary of Bois Voivrotte) it became impracticable for the enemy to send or keep troops in Bois Voivrotte unless he drove my Battalion from Bois Frehaut. He was still at liberty, however, to rain artillery fire upon it. But here it is officially from the commander of the 2nd Bn. 366th Inf. On page 151, Brigade report: “3:05 p. m. Telephone message from C. O. 2nd Bn. 366th Inf. that he had withdrawn his lines to southern edge of Bois Voivrotte because of heavy enemy shelling—high explosives and gas in woods.” This final cessation of their efforts to hold Bois Voivrotte and withdrawal of their lines to the southern edge of it was one reason for the next entry on same page: “3:55 p. m. Orders received from Commanding General 92nd Division not to launch attack as planned for 5 p. m., but to consolidate positions gained, holding them at all costs against possible counter attacks.” For how could the other units that were supposed to attack through the units supposed to be holding Bois Voivrotte advance beyond its northern boundary when as a matter of fact according to the Battalion C. O.—directly in command—they were only holding the southern boundary. Obviously it was necessary to recapture Bois Voivrotte and hold it—all of it, before they could consider capturing anything beyond, or north of it.

The other reason for the calling off by the Division Commander of the attack scheduled to be launched from the northern boundaries of Bois Frehaut and Bois Voivrotte at 5 p. m., on the 10th, was equally obvious. For how could the units scheduled to attack through the 2nd Battalion of the 365th then holding the northern boundary of Bois Frehaut, be expected to advance beyond us when they had never succeeded, due to enemy artillery fire, in reaching even the southern boundary of Bois Frehaut.

At the time when the attack beyond Bois Voivrotte was almost due to be launched by other units of the 366th they were not holding Bois Voivrotte but had withdrawn their line to the southern edge and were holding what previously had been no-man’s land—very much narrower there than in front of Ferme de Belle Aire. As can readily be seen, this failure to hold, on their part, left me in a precarious condition should the enemy in force attempt to envelop us through Bois Voivrotte. This was largely the cause for the order to the artillery mentioned in the Division Report, page 160: “11 Nov. 3:59—Artillery directed to put down barrage on northern edge of Bois Voivrotte, this point not being occupied by our troops.” I think, bearing in mind General Pershing’s brief remarks relative to attacks on the 11th of November, that this covers them all, including troops of the 7th Division attacking through the C. R. adjoining the 367th on the left.

What does all this mean? It means that of all the battalions concerned or engaged in attacking toward Metz during the drive that started the morning of November 10th, the only battalion that accomplished its mission, or in other words, the only one that was able to carry out its orders—the only one that captured and held anything, was the 2nd Battalion of the 365th Infantry. Had this battalion not succeeded in capturing and holding Bois Frehaut, in fact had it not succeeded in all of its various missions at all times, and had its companies, as companies, not succeeded in all their various missions, I would not be publishing any book about it at all, let alone praising the battalion as I have.

But let us see some more quotations from things included in Dr. Scott’s History. Ralph W. Tyler, the colored war correspondent, writing, necessarily from hearsay mostly, at a time when the confusion and din of battle made it impossible to foresee results, could, however, see the landscape in general and he knew who was attacking and later who was holding Bois Frehaut. He also visited Bois Frehaut after the armistice, so among other things he wrote, page 289: “... and so the 2nd Battalion went into action with but one white officer, the Major. No unit in the advance had a more difficult position to take and hold than the position assigned to the 2nd Battalion of the 365th. The Bois Frehaut was a network of barbed-wire entanglements, and the big guns in Metz had nothing to do but sweep the woods with a murderous fire, which they did most effectively. French and Senegalese in turn had failed to hold these woods, for it was worse than a hell—it had become the sepulchre of hundreds. I (Ralph W. Tyler) was over and through these woods; I saw the mass of barbed-wire entanglements; I saw the nests in the trees in which Germans had camouflaged machine guns that rained a fire upon the Allied troops.

“It is impossible to describe this scene of carnage. The order to the colored men of the 365th was to ‘take and hold’ although it was believed, almost to a certainty, that they could not hold it, even if they did take it. But they did take and hold it, and these men of the 2nd Battalion, with Spartan-like courage; with an endurance unbelievable, would be holding the position at this writing had not the armistice been signed or had they not received orders to retire.”He also says that “the Major commanding stated to me that the world had never produced gamer fighters than the colored men who made up his battalion of the 365th infantry.” But his next three paragraphs as quoted in “Scott’s History” are mostly erroneous as to previous conditions. The records will show (the necessary records are not in that book), but every one who was in the 365th Infantry and most every one in the Division knows that the 2nd Bn. 365th held the front line battalion sector east of the Moselle called C. R. Musson continuously for thirty-one days, then went back, occupied the second line of defense for three days (during which time various units marched up and engaged the enemy to ascertain his strength), returned to Pont-a-Mousson on the 9th and attacked on the morning of the 10th. During this time the 1st and 3rd Battalions took turns holding the C. R. on our right—C. R. Les Menils. I had not read Dr. Scott’s book at the time I made my lecture. During the Division’s occupancy of the St. Die sector this battalion held a front line sector continuously. In the Argonne it did road work as close to the advanced line as any of the battalions. The Division was praised by General Pershing for its work in facilitating traffic during the Argonne Meuse drive, that is, the early part of that drive. Elements of the 368th Infantry were in the attacking line for a short time. Early in October the entire Division was moved out of the Argonne-Meuse section and to the Marbache sector. No battalion of the 368th Infantry ever held a front line position in the Marbache sector.

To show you how Mr. Tyler was impressed with Bois Frehaut I will quote from his writings again. Page 286, Dr. Scott’s book: “The armistice stopped their advance into Berlin, but they did reach the nearest point to the German city of Metz in what was designed as a victorious march to Berlin, and the valor they displayed, their courageous, heroic fighting all along that advance, won for our men in the 92nd Division high praise from superior officers, including the corps and division commanders, for they never wavered an instant, not even in that awful hell, the Frehaut Woods, upon which the big guns of Metz constantly played, which the Senegalese were unable to hold, but which our colored soldiers from America did take and did hold, until the signal came announcing the cessation of hostilities.”

I shall now give a few more extracts from the Brigade Commander’s report. On page 150, same book: “At 10 a. m. (Nov. 10th) a runner message was received from the Commanding Officer, 2nd Bn., 365th Inf., to the effect that they were being heavily shelled in the Bois Frehaut by enemy artillery, and requesting counter battery fire; it was also stated that their advance had almost reached the northern edge of Bois Frehaut. Heavy artillery was asked to counter-fire on enemy artillery, which they promptly did.” I sent this message about 9 o’clock.

On page 151, Brigade report: “At 11:15 a. m. a message from the C. O. 2nd Bn. 365th Inf. to the effect that Bois Frehaut was completely occupied, that Boches were shelling woods with gas and high explosives, and requesting counter battery fire.” This was the message spoken of in the lecture that I sent at 10 o’clock by pigeon to Division Headquarters. It was read there and relayed to Brigade Headquarters (situated in another village).

Page 152, Brigade report: “Our advance was for a depth of about three and one-half kilometers. When this Brigade took over the sector just east of the Moselle river there was a deep re-entrant next to the river, due to the St. Mihiel drive which advanced the line several kilometers on the west bank of the Moselle river, while the line on the east bank remained in place.”

The reason it “remained in place” was that neither French, Americans nor Senegalese troops had succeeded in getting into it (Bois Frehaut) very far—let alone taking and holding it.

Page 153, Brigade report: “Full use was made of auxiliary arms, machine guns, 37 millimeter guns, Stokes mortars and rifle grenades. All of these weapons, except Stokes mortars were brought into play in the heavy fighting in the Bois Frehaut to combat enemy machine gun nests. 37 mm. guns were pushed well to the front when direct fire at enemy machine gun positions could be obtained. It was to the extensive use of these weapons that the rapid advance through Bois Frehaut was due. Machine guns were used frequently to cover the flanks of the attacking infantry. They aided materially in protecting the N. E. corner of the Bois Frehaut from an enemy counter attack from BouxiÈres. Trench mortars were placed in position after the Frehaut woods were taken, to cover the new front.”

Page 154, Brigade report: “The lines held by the Germans were unusually strong, being the result of four years of stabilization in that sector. Their artillery was most active, as unquestionably during these years they had registered on every point of importance in the sector. Furthermore, their positions were the first line of defense of Metz. The troops occupying them were young, efficient men and not old soldiers from a rest sector.”

I wish to state here that our Division artillery rendered excellent service. This is especially true when we consider that it had been in the line only a few days.

But a very apparent inconsistency appears in the Brigade report and is embodied in the Division report, page 161: “The attack was renewed on the morning of the 11th, the lines being advanced to the northern edge of the Bois Frehaut a distance of three and one-half km. from an original line.” The Division report says, as you notice, that the line was advanced on the 11th to the northern edge of Bois Frehaut, the Division commander well knowing that the line never was advanced beyond the northern edge of Bois Frehaut, for the next paragraph refers to the final battle line, which the co-ordinates show was the northern edge of Bois Frehaut, but the Brigade report upon which this part of the Division report is based by a Division commander who took command just after the armistice says, page 152: “The attack on the morning of Nov. 10, by units of the Brigade wiped out this re-entrant by advancing our lines on the east bank of the Moselle river a distance of two and one-quarter km. The advance thus made was held against heavy artillery and machine gun fire and high concentration of gas. The attack was renewed on the morning of Nov. 11, lines being advanced a distance of three and one-quarter km. an original line.”

That would indicate an advance of one km. on Nov. 11th. I don’t care to discuss that further than to say that it is incorrect. The final battle line shows as the northern edge of Bois Frehaut. The Division report says, “the attack was renewed on the morning of the 11th the lines being advanced to the northern edge of Bois Frehaut, a distance of three and one-half km. from an original line.” Since, as clearly shown, the line was never advanced beyond the northern edge of Bois Frehaut where was that advance made? Speaking of this mysterious advance of the 11th the Brigade report says, “Our liaison with troops west of the river was thereby greatly improved,” indicating that the said unexplainable and vague “advance” was near the river—hence on my front.

General Pershing says that “examination of the records shows that the 2nd Battalion did take the Bois Frehaut on November 10th and that this battalion held this position until the armistice went into effect.” How could he say that we took the Bois Frehaut on Nov. 10th if there was a km. (which is almost a mile) remaining of it to be taken on Nov. 11th? Of the advance of the 11th he says, “advanced a short distance but had retired to cover.”

This same Brigade report shows that at 10 a. m., Nov. 10th, a message was received showing that the 2nd Bn. 365th Inf. had almost reached the northern edge of Bois Frehaut, and that at 11:15, Nov. 10th a message was received showing the Bois Frehaut was completely occupied. The quotation above from the same report says that the re-entrant was wiped out by advancing our lines on the east bank of the Moselle on November 10th and that the advance thus made was held against heavy artillery and machine gun fire, etc. The Brigade order for the attack on November 11th—the order from which Gen. Pershing quoted, plainly shows that that attack was to be launched from the northern edge of Bois Frehaut—our front line.

It is too bad to have to spend time correcting such a discrepancy as that, but that’s the way it reads in Dr. Scott’s book and I have no reason to think that the Brigade and Division reports are erroneously printed in that book. It might give a wrong impression to a casual reader. Some might not take the trouble to see that no advance was made and held on the 11th of November. The line was advanced to the northern edge of Bois Frehaut on November 10th and never receded so much as one foot for a single instant. Few enough colored battalions had the opportunity to prove their true worth. I do not propose to leave a single cloud on the record of the glorious success and achievements of one colored battalion. This does not in the least detract from the glory of other units but will add greatly to the prestige and standing of colored soldiers as a whole.

In another place the report of the general commanding our Brigade says, page 154, Dr. Scott’s book: “The commanding officers of units making the attack, and also of the artillery, were constantly stating that they were hurried into these movements without proper preparation. Had they been familiar with such operations, the time allowed would have been sufficient.” The Major General, commanding the 92nd Division who made the Division report on the operations of November 10th and 11th says, page 162, same book: “The attack was made on very brief preparation, too brief in view of the strength of the enemy positions, which were very strongly held.”

I told in the lecture what the Second Battalion of the Three Hundred and Sixth-fifth Infantry had undergone in the Marbache Sector and how we worked all of the night preceding the attack on things that had to be done regardless of familiarity with anything. I do not remember that I made any complaints about the shortness of time for preparation. Possibly I did, for I was at all times doing anything and everything to insure success against the enemy. But whether the time was too short or too long I again call your attention to the fact that this battalion accomplished its mission, fully, completely, magnificently, under the guns of Metz.

Lieutenant Colonel A. E. Deitsch, a veteran of the Regular Army, who was my immediate superior and was in command of our Regiment during that drive, and who, before coming to our Regiment, had served in other Divisions in the battle line, said in a letter to me: “The handling of your battalion during the ninth, tenth and morning of November eleventh, 1918, (which lead to the capture of Bois Frehaut) could not, I believe, have been conducted any better. As you well know the capture of this position is credited to you and your battalion.”

On page 154, same book, the Brigade report, speaking of the work of the Brigade as a whole, says: “There is no doubt that some details of the operation were not carried out as well as might have been done by more experienced troops. These were the results of mistaken judgment due to lack of experience rather than to lack of offensive spirit.”

This is true of the Brigade as a whole and the report from which it is copied is a very general statement of the work of the entire Brigade in that series of operations. I say and have shown and am ready to prove more exhaustively if necessary that the above statement does not concern one of the six infantry battalions of that Brigade, namely, the Second Battalion, Three Hundred and Sixty-fifth.

Suppose I should admit or should say that the battalion that captured this seemingly impregnable position and held it continuously under the defenses of Metz, was only a very mediocre battalion, or suppose I should admit or should say, “Oh, yes, the men were anxious enough and after they got going fought savagely with razors or knives or bayonets, but the colored officers had no judgment and could not handle their men and it was a pretty poor battalion.” What then could be said, what would have to be said of the other units of the Ninety-second Division and of units engaged of the Seventh Division that failed utterly to accomplish their missions during the same attack?

The truth is that those other battalions and units that failed to advance and hold against the world’s strongest position—Metz—were excellent troops and in many instances did most heroic work. They were fully equal on the average to battalions and units of the foremost American Divisions. The truth is equally clear to every one who knows or wants to know that the Second Battalion of the Three Hundred and Sixty-fifth Infantry was a most exceptional, a most wonderful battalion, fully equal in all respects to the very finest battalions in the American Army or any army that fought in the Great World War. I challenge any one to disprove this statement.

They were wonderful fighters with the trench knife and bayonet, but they were equally efficient and energetic with all other infantry arms. Take the other extreme from fighting—paper work. The paper work that had to be done in a company of our army was staggering. It required ceaseless work and absolute accuracy. The companies of this battalion were unsurpassed. “H” Company, for instance, as is well known, did and turned in paper work that was practically perfect at all times. Then there was march or road discipline. Some of the marches made were very trying. As an example, the Second Battalion of the Three Hundred and Sixty-fifth Infantry marched from Camp d’Italien in the Argonne Forest to Camp Cabaud north east of Les Isilett during the night, through mud and through the confusion and blockade of traffic you have all heard about, just preceding the Argonne Offensive, and arrived with every man who started. Not one straggler. I furnished signed certificates before it could be believed by my superiors. I have already referred to the very significant fact that no officers were ever placed under arrest or sent before efficiency boards. Every statement I have made and every inference I have drawn is based on a personal knowledge of facts.

My efforts to make that Battalion a real success were due solely to the fact that it was an American Battalion engaged in the fight against our Nation’s enemies. My enlisted men were colored and they wore the American uniform. My Officers were colored and they were commissioned, not by me, but by the United States Government. If you are colored or if perchance you are white and care to do some thinking about me and about my Battalion and about many things in general, read on pages 433 and 438 of the book I have been referring to. By the way, the Battalion Commander there referred to relieved me (he was then a Lieutenant Colonel) of the command of the Regiment (Three Hundred and Sixty-fifth Infantry) the second day after the Armistice took effect.

It is my idea of justice that the race—namely the American Negro—that produced men who served their country so loyally, so bravely, so capably both as officers and as enlisted men under my command, should know the truth about my battalion. It would matter little whether the outfit were a division, a brigade or a battalion. It happens to have been a battalion. And it matters little what colored battalion it was, but it does matter a great deal and mean a great deal to Colored Americans that one of the very finest and greatest battalions in the American Army and in the world was an American colored battalion.

If what I have said about my Colored Battalion shall in any way aid, or shall inspire and stimulate Colored Americans in their struggle for advancement and for the attainment of Righteousness that “Exalteth a nation,” I shall be gratified.

The following is the testimonial I referred to. It substantiates some things spoken of in the lecture.

Headquarters 365th Infantry.

Major Warner A. Ross, 365th Infantry, commander of the 2nd Battalion, while leading his battalion and part of the First Battalion into action in the “Bois Frehaut” on the east bank of the Moselle River north of Pont-a-Musson and under the guns of Metz, on the morning of November 10th, 1918, with Brigade orders to capture and hold this strong German position, displayed most exceptional bravery, coolness and efficiency under heavy fire. He personally led his forces and established his first waves in their firing position in no-man’s land immediately in front of the enemy’s observers, machine gunners and snipers. He then, after encouraging his men through enemy wire, under heavy barrage established his Post of Command in the edge of the “Bois Frehaut” in what just before was enemy territory. This Post of Command was a shell hole with no protection from artillery fire and was established in this place so that runners coming back from platoons and companies could follow the edge of the wood and easily find him. This he maintained as his P. C. until 10:30 o’clock on the morning of the 11th, when news of the Armistice reached him.

Major Ross refused to move his Headquarters despite the fact that a hostile plane had located it and that others abandoned it. Shrapnel burst over it and high explosive shells tore great holes all around it. The sides were caved in and he was once almost completely buried. During the night it became filled with mustard gas. He ordered lime sprinkled in it and a fire built and remained. By moving to a less exposed position or to a dugout his liaison would have been impaired. It was excellent liaison that enabled him to send in reinforcements to meet counter attacks and flank movements attempted by the enemy.

The bravery of Major Ross and his indifference to personal safety in his determination to win this battle are considered worthy of special recognition. Such conduct is far in excess of the ordinary line of duty of a Battalion Commander. The “Bois Frehaut,” “Belle Aire Ferme,” “Ferme de Pence” and “Bois de la tete d’Or” were taken from the enemy and the battle line changed by this victory.

Witnesses (Signed):

Edward B. Simmons,
Major, Medical Corps, Regimental Surgeon.
F. E. Sweitzer,
Captain, 365th Inf., Regtl. Adjutant.
T. C. Hopkins,
Captain, 365th Inf., Regtl. Intelligence Officer.
Walter R. Sanders,
Captain, 365th Inf., Second in Command at that time.
Wm. W. Green,
Captain, 365th Inf., Comdg. Co. H, 365th Inf.
John F. Pritchard,
1st Lieut., 365th Inf., Adjutant, 2nd Bn.
Garrett M. Lewis,
1st Lieut., 365th Inf., Comdg. Reserve Co. at that time.
U. J. Robinson,
1st Lieut., 365th Inf., Chaplain.

The End