Queries on a Croix de Guerre Medal awarded for action April 1918

[Mark1959]

So Kaye is womba's father? Womba needs to confirm. If so I have also got the wrong end of the stick 

[wandererpaul]

I think G S Kaye is the officer who received the awards and wombas ancestor didn’t. That’s my take.....

[MaxD]

Depends what "received" means.  I take it (war diary and French letter (sorry)) says Kaye was awarded it , officer X received it on his behalf.

 

And yes, Kaye is taken to be Womba's father.

 

Max

[charlie962]

8 hours ago, womba said:

I have war records for my father and two other of his fellow officers and an actual extract from the war diary of  a third officer for the 24th April 1918 (in my sister's records) which places my father in command at the time, but suffering from gas. The only useful information in their official records is that both my father and the third officer were transferred after injury / gassing on either 24th or 25th April 1918.

Looking back over Womba's comments he seems to state clearly that Gerald's brother made the tape recording that is linked.

So Kaye is not Womba's father.

 

What we need is Womba's father's name, sight of relevent service history from his file, and then the extracts of the 3rd officer's diary;

 

Charlie

 

PS Excellent research by Forum so far.

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

I read it that Kaye is not Woomba's father.

Apart from the facts given, surely a poster wouldn't describe his father in the following way?

 

"...no one has recommended the officer's name should be suppressed... I would have thought his family would never get to see this thread ... His name was Gerald Steinfeld Kaye..."

[MaxD]

Oh Kaye(sorry again)  is not the father.  Clearing my mind:

 

Kaye (who did get a Croix de Guerre and who was sent from 24 Battery to take command  temporarily of 72 Battery that had been savagely mauled) is  one of three officers

 

Another is Womba's father who served in 24 Battery

 

Another is an officer for whom Womba's sister has a diary.

 

If that's right, don't all shout at once 

 

For the record, those officers (I shall leave out the men for brevity), who are listed in the French CRA's order are (spelling as per the French order)

12 Brigade - this is 12 Heavy Battery RGA not an RFA brigade

 

Lt Col Kelsall

Lt Bartleet

Capt A Barker

38 Brigade - listed in 38 Brigade diary - in brackets names from the LG list

 

Lt Col Hood  (Edward Thesiger Frankland Hood DSO)

Major Louis Connoly  (Louis Andrew Connolly MC)

Maj Francis Scott (Francis Gerald Scott)

Capt Lesle Atkinson (Leslie Vero Atkinson MC)

Capt Gerald Kaye (Gerald Steenfeld Kaye)

Lt Eric Foster (Eric Walter Foster)

Lt Young (John McGlashan Young MC)

11 Brigade

 

Lt Col Bruson

Maj Dare

Maj Carne

Maj Green

Capt Husk

Lt Hayes

Capt Stakes

242 Siege

 

Major Thacker

319 Siege

 

Maj Uggins

 

Max

:

 

 

Edited 18 July , 2019 by MaxD
Amendment to 12 Brigade

[Ron Clifton]

On 16/07/2019 at 14:50, MaxD said:

There was no 24th Battery.

24 Battery RFA was part of 38 Brigade, in 6 Division until Jan 1917 when it became an Army Field Artillery Brigade.

 

Ron

[charlie962]

5 hours ago, MaxD said:

Has commanded his battery from 23 April to 1 May 1918, showing exceptional sang-froid under murderous bombardments and a more than perfect contempt for danger (my translation).

But from Kaye's record we have him 2 i/c 24 Bty until 26 April then to 72 Bty as temporary CO ??

 

Womba's GF's tale would seem more possible if Womba's father was in 72 Bty. We need Womba to give us sight of his father's service !

 

Edited 17 July , 2019 by charlie962

[charlie962]

6 minutes ago, Ron Clifton said:

24 Battery RFA was part of 38 Brigade,

Ron, It's a confusing thread. But Max corrected himself in post 21 . Charlie

[MaxD]

 

12 hours ago, charlie962 said:

But from Kaye's record we have him 2 i/c 24 Bty until 26 April then to 72 Bty as temporary CO ??

The detail for the citations written by the French CRA would have been supplied by the British and may well have been misinterpreted..  23 April was the date of the attachment of the 25 Div artillery to the French.  The war diary, taken with Kaye's record  is clear, he took temporary command of 72 Battery (from 24 Battery) on 26 April. He had not been in battery command when that occurred, Maj Francis Scott was BC 24.

 

The relinquishment of 2 i/c on 25 May 1918  (record and LG) suggests that he remained as second in command of 72 Battery until that date, the temporary command relating not to a formal command appointment but to the particular circumstances.

 

However, as everyone agrees, it really is crucial to making sense of this to know exactly how Womba's father fits into it.  I keep looking back at the quote in the first post.  There was only one battery that had "every officer killed or wounded" and that was 72 Battery.  Two officers went to 72 Battery on 26 April, Kaye (from 24) and a 2 /Lt Walsh from A Battery 38 Brigade.  I didn't mention the latter because he didn't figure in the Croix de Guerre list.  Is he officer X?

 

Max          

[wandererpaul]

17 hours ago, MaxD said:

For the record, those officers (I shall leave out the men for brevity), who are listed in the French CRA's order are (spelling as per the French order)

 

38 Brigade - listed in 38 Brigade diary - in brackets names from the LG list

 

Lt Col Hood  (Edward Thesiger Frankland Hood DSO)

Major Louis Connoly  (Louis Andrew Connolly MC)

Maj Francis Scott (Francis Gerald Scott)

Capt Lesle Atkinson (Leslie Vero Atkinson MC)

Capt Gerald Kaye (Gerald Steenfeld Kaye)

Lt Eric Foster (Eric Walter Foster)

Lt Young (John McGlashan Young MC)

 

Has this cancelled out the theory then that the award was to the RFA Unit and not to Capt G S Kaye? 

 

From the opening post; "There is clear evidence that the French awarded the Croix de Guerre to the RFA unit, I presume the 24th Battery. The following, though, is anecdotal evidence which I would like to confirm."

 

We therefore, so far, have evidence that the C de G was awarded to the man and not the unit. There's also evidence that the Military Cross was a King's birthday honour, likely for general service throughout WW1, and not for a specific battle, such as the one being discussed.

 

Briliant research so far. 

 

And as charlie962 says, it would be the perfect time for womba to mention his g/father's name and rank etc.

 

People on here can then ascertain where it all fits in........

 

 

 

Edited 18 July , 2019 by wandererpaul

[MaxD]

 

The question of the unit award did not need cancelling out by the war diary.   "Honour Titles of the Royal Artillery" by Maj Gen B P Hughes (and a passing knowledge of Gunner history) is clear that the only Royal Artillery unit that has received that award, in that case the Croix de Guerre with Palms is 5 (Gibraltar 1779-1783) Battery Royal Artillery received for the action of 27 May 1918.  The list on this forum cited in post #5 shows 5 Battery.  The present day battery proudly display the emblem of the Croix on their battery devices.

 

In case I didn't make it clear, the names I listed (plus the NCOs and men) were all cited in the French order of 18 May 1918 and were all subsequently published in the London Gazette.

 

The statement "there is clear evidence...." is about as correct as the assertion later on that 24 Battery was founded in 1576.

 

Max

[dgibson150]

The audio recording of Kaye's brother is here I think. I have only just found it and have not played it.

Please ignore, the link is already on this thread, sorry.

 

David

Edited 18 July , 2019 by dgibson150

[womba]

Releasing Kaye's name certainly produced results! Well done to Paul for tracking down the gazette and Military Cross entries. It is good to have that confirmation. The analysis of Kaye's file by Mark was also useful.

 

But it was Max's tracking down of WO 95/294/10 war diary of 38 Brigade which was the big surprise. I have already paid my £3.50 for a copy and spent it seems forever wrestling with Photoshop making the very faint text readable.

 

There seems to be conflict between that diary and both Kaye's file and the anecdotal story I have always accepted as a background. I will need time to analyse and correlate all the material. But thanks again for all your help.

 

Mark writes that Ken contributes to GWF which is fine. Mark also says he may have been looking at the wrong unit. That can hardly be true since the quote he called fictitious was preceded by "from [my father's] memoirs". So he was clearly calling someone a liar and he needed to be called out for that. I notice that he hasn't contributed this time.

 

I will need time to analyse and correlate all the material. I will post again when I have given everything more consideration. But thanks again for all your help.

[kenf48]

I was indeed looking at 24 Brigade as it was not clear which unit the OP was referring to but having established the correct unit for which I congratulate the forum given the obfuscation and coyness exhibited was quite an achievement.  I have nothing further to add.

 

Ken

[MaxD]

Do be aware that the diary and the records will never be 100% correct, discrepancies are to be expected, there was a war on!

 

Looking forward to your next thoughts.

 

Max

[womba]

I realise I just posted without refreshing the thread. There were a number of posts on the second page which I had not seen. It's midnight here in Perth but I should respond.

 

The very old story in my family was that the C d G medal was awarded to Kaye although he was not present in the action for which the award was made. Since I have released Gerald Kaye's name I may as well be fully open with the case.

 

The following is from my sister's writing (for a book which was never completed):

 

"An excerpt from the diary of Captain M. “Daddy “ Holmes 25^th April 1918 puts Clair in the middle of the fighting:

 

Wakened early - about 2.45, by a tremendously heavy bombardment. It went on for hours. About 2 hours later I thought it changed to our guns, but as things got no quieter, I got up about 5 and sent Garner on his bike to the guns. He hadn’t been gone many minutes when young Gunner Pipe, who had been at the guns as mounted orderly, arrived in his stockings on his bare-backed horse with a message from Brockway.

 

Nearly all the Battery casualties.

 

Dear Skipper, Send up detachments, telephonists, and have horses ready.

 

P.S. At least 4 telephonists and if possible 2 detachments; one mounted orderly and Mr Barrow. Have ammunition ready to come up.

 

The Major )

Babbage     ) badly wounded

Priest        )

Morris gassed.

 

The writing very bad - Brockway himself was suffering from gas and had been blown off his feet but was carrying on, now in command."

 

(Walter St Clair Brockway is my father. I have the same name.)

 

I notice that the names Brockway and Babbage are mentioned in The 38 Brigade war diary that Max uncovered.

 

My sister and I always believed that it was this action for which the award was made. That he was one of only four officers left standing from a whole brigade. This was recorded more than once in newspaper print. The story was that Kaye was not in the battery at the time. That Brockway was transferred to hospital immediately after the battle  - his record shows this - and that Kaye had assumed subsequent command. That Kaye then received the medal as the commanding officer of the battery.

 

All the anecdotal evidence - Kaye's reluctance to speak to his brother about the circumstances surrounding the award; the missing citation after his death, presumably evidence he was uncomfortable with; his wife drawing my mother aside to ask the details of the medal because her husband wouldn't talk about it - all seemed to support the original story.

 

But the war diary does not seem to support the story. The dreadful carnage during battles for Kemmel Hill you read on the internet - from one account -

 

"To give you an idea of the violence of the fight, only 57 of the 5,294 French soldiers who died on this hill were identified" 

 

 - are not evident from the war diary. Which confuses me. It even says that Brockway was posted to the 72nd Battery on 28.03.1918. It even seems to conflict with Kaye's own file. So I am going to have to study all the evidence and try to make sense of it all.

 

The following are extracts from my father's war record and another from a fellow RFA officer, Philip Russell.

 

Extract Russell's WWI Record Kew.pdf Extract Clair's WWI Record Kew.pdf

[charlie962]

A couple of bits of Interest:

MIC

 

and atleast his second MiD

[MaxD]

There are a number of things you should take into account as you mull over what you have..

 

Firstly, it is important to use the correct unit designation, That he was one of only four officers left standing from a whole brigade.The brigade comprised four batteries and a headquarters.  While four officers left from a battery is understandable, 4 from the whole brigade simply isn't.

 

Secondly your puzzlement about the lack of carnage.  The guns were, as is normal, some distance away from the infantry action.  There was some minor movement but on the days in question the batteries were some 5000 yards to the west of Kemmel Hill, to the south and west of Westoutre.  More importantly, the location of 72 Battery when it was heavily shelled on 25 April was Mont Rouge (Red Mount)..

 

The important locations are all on the map at the link here:

https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=14&lat=50.7888&lon=2.7991&layers=101464933&b=1

 

Westoutre is to the top left in square M9, Kemmell Hill is way over to the east in square N 25 and N 26.  72 Battery (Mont Rouge) was in square M22.  There was carnage but it was as described in the diary and in the Capt Holmes' extract you show above.

 

Posting date anomalies.  Encountered all the time.  The date the diary says Brockway was posted to 72 Battery, 28 March, was when he was in UK at Shoeburyness.  Your own original post says he was with 24 Battery when all this took place.  I don't know, both batteries are on his medal card (thanks Charlie) and record.  

 

The diary says Capt Kaye to tempy command 72 Battery.  The entry is made after a report of shelling continuing until 10 pm,  Did he go from 24 Battery or was he in 72 Battery but not in the gun position.  Some officers' positions in action were not at the guns.

 

I am now clear that this all centres on the contention that Kaye was not at the battery when it was shelled, he arrived afterwards and the opinion is held that he should not have received the Croix de Guerre.
The war diary doesn't say exactly when he went although it could be interpreted as saying he arrived after the event.  However, he continued to command the battery until early May at least  and no doubt played a part in the orderly evacuation of the wounded.

 

It must also be borne in mind how these types of awards come about.  Any idea that the Col Commandant of the French Artillery knew all these officers and men personally or even saw their efforts is wide of the mark.  After the attachment, he would have said (in French) "I wouid like to recommend some of your men for an award for their for their parts in the recent action, please give me some names and where they fit in to the action"  The Brigade CO duly obliges and the French CRA writes them up and passes them to his own authorities as well as the British..

 

The Brigade CO Lt Col Edward Thesiger Frankland Hood DSO RFA unfortunately die of wounds on 15 May 1918 so there presumably are no memoires..

 

While happy to contribute to technical Gunner questions about the brigade/batteries/men I shall refrain from commenting  on the central contention. I wasn't here.

 

Max

 

PS  I add this PS as a loose end that requires much more investigation if anyone cares to take it on? .I suggest it is best separated from the main discussion?

 

Lt Col  Hood's CWGC entry says Received the Croix de Guerre (France) on the field at the same time that the Legion of Honour was bestowed on the guns of his Brigade.   I find no support anywhere for that last statement and frankly believe it to be wrong.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[charlie962]

6 minutes ago, MaxD said:

I add this PS as a loose end

!!!!

[MaxD]

Not a comment but an observation.

 

It is, I think, worth noting that of the 27 Croix de Guerre awards (those 19 officers listed earlier and 8 men) only one is directly related to the bombardment of 72 Battery.  It is that of 67477 Sergeant Peter B Young for “personally taking command of the guns when all his officers were hors de combat”.    

The wording in the French citation for Kaye A brillamment commandé sa batterie du 23 Avril au 1 Mai 1918, faisant preuve sous les bombardements les plus meutriers  d’un sang-froid exceptionnel et du plus parfait mépris du danger (translated earlier) is exactly the same as that used in another six citations.  No surprise really but tends perhaps to show that the Croix was not, except in the case of Sgt Young,  awarded for the specific action on the day of the  bombardment but for the whole period of the attachment to the French.  None of the officers named in the message reported sent from the battery  received the award.

 Max

[charlie962]

Max

Which battery was Gnr W Squire in ? His CdeG was for specific action at Kemmel as 'the only battery runner left at the end of the action'.(source newspaper clipping)

Charlie

 

edit-  is it me or can I no longer get that 'preview' of war diary on Discovery ?

Edited 19 July , 2019 by charlie962

[MaxD]

He was in 72 Battery, his service record has survived (he was 103735 Driver W Squire).  His citation from the French identifies him as a runner, he received an MM in Aug 1918 and is in the same Nov 1918 Croix de Guerre list, with his battery shown, as the others (although his number is one digit wrong)..  There were two other runners in the list, both from A Battery.

 

There is no doubt that the battery referred to in the sister's quote is 72 Battery.  Sgt Young is positively ID'd as 72 Battery, the others are

2/Lt Benjamin Priest MC 72 Battery 38 Brigade died of his wounds on 26 April 1918 in a Casualty Clearing Station.

2/Lt CM Babbage had been commissioned from the ranks in June 1917 and was in A Battery 38 Brigade in Oct 1917 when he had a short spell of enteritis.

Capt (later Major) Philip Russell 72 Battery 38 Brigade record shows he was awarded an MC and later a bar to his MC although this latter has not been found.

Capt (Major) William Kersley  Holmes 72 Battery (presumably the battery commander and “Daddy” because he had been in France since 1915))

Morris – not clearly identified too many Morris’s

Too many possibilities for the two Gunners mentioned

By placing the action at Kemmel, the newspaper may well have persuaded the family of Driver Squire that he earned his award at Kemmel Hill rather than at the Battle of Kemmel.  He was a runner between 38 Brigade HQ and the French artillery HQ which, although I don't have a map reference for, was certainly pretty much in the same Westoutre area.

 

Max

[womba]

For those who don't already have it and are interested, here is a link to a visually enhanced version of the 38 Brigade war diary (the original is virtually unreadable).

 

https://is.gd/LEAnid

 

Just a few points.

 

My use of the name 24th Battery in my original post came from that para of Clair Brockway's record which I quoted, nothing more. So it should not be taken seriously in examining the details of what happened in April 1918. When I wrote that I had not looked in detail at the individual officers' records which I posted. If Clair was in the 72nd Battery at the time so be it. That excerpt from Holmes' diary which I quoted did not mention the battery number. So perhaps it was from the 72nd Battery.

 

I take Max's point that foreign commendations and awards are the result of sets of headquarters' decisions and movements. That could easily have resulted in the wrong people being commended or rewarded when the people they have on their lists do not match those on the ground.

 

That list of commendations in the war diary, many of which are identical, has no direct connection, as far as I have observed, to any medals awarded. However there is some similarity between Kaye's citation and the description of the medal citation given by Kay's brother. So it seems likely that same citation was used for the medal.

[MaxD]

Indeed, I could have left out the unit designation comment.

 

Sgt Young's commendation directly refers to his specific action on the day which accords directly with the war diary entry.

 

It would be nice to know whether our work has now satisfied your query..

 

Max