BRITISH MACHINE GUNNERS TRAINED BY ‘CANUCKS’.

[GrandsonMichael]

This startling information was revealed on the CEF Study Group a while ago by Borden Battery, who transcribed the text of taped interviews with Brutinel. Link.

However, this information has not been corroborated by any other source and I wonder whether anyone can provide leads to falsify or prove this claim.

Cheers, Michael

Tape 21: B.G.H.Q. Machine Gun Courses - CMGC and Field Marshall Haig

Although we did not agree with the teachings of the B.G.H,Q. Machine Gun Schools, as a matter of policy we ordered that Machine Gun Officers belonging to the Infantry Battalions or to the Motor Brigade should be sent to these Schools in order to maintain a sort of unity of doctrines. Several times the Officers and N.C.O.'s sent had complained bitterly that the Courses were not only a loss of time but that they gave birth to strong resentment about the remarks made by some of the Officers instructing, about Colonists in general, and Canadians in particular.

The difference in doctrine between the Canadians and the British was such that I felt the case should be submitted to the Canadian Corps Headquarters.

After hearing what I had to say, the Corps Commander felt that he should discuss the matter with Lieut. General Sir Henry Horne, commanding the 1st Army, of which we were part.

General Horne took a very serious view of the situation arising out of the incidents reported and decided forthwith to inform Sir Douglas Haig about it and he drove to B.G.H.Q.

The C. in C. said that obviously something was amiss. He had already received adverse reports from other sources. Could a curriculum be submitted, revising and implementing the Machine Gun Courses of the B.G.H.Q. Schools?

On his return from B.G.H.Q., General Horne called the Canadian Corps and Sir Arthur Currie instructed me to submit a program of reorganisation for the British Machine Gun Schools.

Thanks to my staff, Major G. Forster, Capt, Lawson and Lieuts. Mortimer Backer and Hume, the projects asked for were prepared and submitted within 24 hours, together with a list of British Officers competent and able to reorganise the Machine Gun Schools. I insisted that these Officers should be able not only to work out the details of progressive courses for Machine Gunners but should also be able to lecture intelligently to the Infantry Commanders and other Arms.

These suggestions were adopted without delay by the Commander in Chief who selected Brigadier General Ironsides to supervise the reorganisation approved. This appointment, in my mind, appeared justified by the fact that General Ironsides had been G.S.O.1. of the 4th Canadian Division and was presumably conversant with the Canadian Corps Machine Gun doctrines.

Canadian War Museum - George Metcalf Archival Collection, Document Number CN=20020045-1525, "The Raymond Brutinel Tapes - 18 October 1962", transcribed by Dwight G. Mercer and presented on the Canadian Expeditionary Force Study Group Discussion Forum. Copyright may rest with the Brutinel Estate.

Before quoting from this information, please consult the copyright rules related to the Brutinel tapes on the CEF Study Group Forum.

[Borden Battery]

The Brutinel Tapes excerpt posted here by GrandsonMichael is from some recently discovered tape transcripts given by retired Brig-General Raymond Brutinel in 1964. They were obtained from the Canadian War Museum and permission to transcribe and post on the CEF Study Group site has been granted.The complete set of transcripts have already been posted on the CEF Study Group and are being further researched and discussed on the CEF forum.

This specific piece regarding Canadian Emma Gees being brought in to re-train the British Emma Gee officers is interesting. However, is it correct, is it partially correct or is it incorrect?

We are looking for referenced material to both support and critique this short transcript - comments and suggestions from GWF members?

Borden Battery

[2ndCMR]

...I frequently visited the Canadians on the subject of machine guns. Not being obsessed by the Military Mind, the commanders were only too willing to try any new suggestion and, if satisfactory, to adopt it. The head machine gun officer, Major Brutinel, was an extremely brilliant and able officer, who not only was eager to test any novel proposals, but in many cases put forward valuable suggestions of his own."

From Chauffeur to Brigadier, by C. D. Baker-Carr, p. 150.

There is no mention of course of the CMG organizing the retraining of the Imperial MGC!

Reading Brutinel's account of that incident and Baker-Carr's account of the absolute hostility of GHQ to the MGC in general, one can imagine how delighted GHQ were to order that the "colonials" retrain them!

[Zipperheads9]

Could it happen? as the Canadians were part of the BEF .

[Borden Battery]

In an earlier tape there is a reference to the Canadian Corps Emma Gees providing some training to the French Army - see Tape 20 below. Brutinel was originally from France but as a Frenchman was enabled to serve with the Canadian Expeditionary Force under degree by M, Poincaré, President of the French Republic [Decree No. 902, dated the 20th of April, 1915 countersigned by M. A. Briand, Minister of Justice].

There are some tapes and references to direct meetings between Brutinel and Field Marshall Foch. This high-level exchange may have been a factor in some of Brutinel's influence. In addition, many of Brutinel's more senior officers were professional engineers, other professionals and bankers - as such - it appears they spent a great deal of time experimenting and documenting the actions, tactics and physics of the machine guns and their impacts.

Borden Battery

Tape 20: Canadian Emma Gees Provide Training for French Army

Interviewer:

General Brutinel, did the successes of the Machine Gunners eventually have an influence on British and French Army thinking?

Reply :

Certainly, and ample evidence to that effect can be supplied.

The French Command was impressed by the results obtained at Vimy and asked the British G.H.Q. to detail the Canadian Corps Machine Gun Officer to Chalon our Marne to lecture on the organisation and employment of machine guns.

A large number of Machine Gun Officers coming from the Regiments, Brigades and Divisions were detailed to attend these lectures.

General Fayolle, then commanding a group of Armies (promoted to the rank of Field Marshall shortly afterwards) kept in very close touch with these lectures, and often participated in the discussions on the points raised.

Eventually he requested that Staff Officers from the Ministère de la Guerre and from the Ministry of Armaments should attend the last lecture dealing with machine guns and their equipment.

At the time there were two kinds of machine guns in service in the French Army - the St. Etiènne, which met the favour of the Staff Officers, and the Hotchkiss, preferred by the Machine Gunners.

In my last lecture, I suggested that considering past experience, the Hotchkiss machine guns should be preferred to the St. Etiènne and issued in large numbers.

I was then briefly told by the Staff Officer of the War Office that my suggestions exceeded the scope of the lectures and that in any case they could not be retained because the Hotchkiss machine guns were not available.

General Fayolle at that point intervened and asked the representative of the Ministry of Armaments if it would be possible to fill promptly orders to supply Hotchkiss machine guns if such orders were given.

The representative said that they were equipped to produce a large quantity of Hotchkiss guns on demand.

A heated argument followed between the Staff Officers of the Ministries concerned.

General Fayolle interrupted this by saying, "This is a very important question and should be settled by the Machine Gunners themselves, not by Staff Officers of the Ministries." Then turning round, he said, "All Officers in favour of the St. Etiènne, will you please stand up." Nobody moved except a young Officer who happened to be under the very eye of the War Office Staff Officer.

Then General Fayolle asked the second question, "All Officers in favour of the Hotchkiss machine guns, will you please stand up." All the Officers jumped up to their feet, including the one who had stood up in favour of the St. Etiènne.

So General Fayolle said, "That settles it. I will take whatever steps are required."

General Fayolle then took the stand that before anything was recommended definitely, all the necessary tests should be made by his Machine Gun School under the command of Capt. de Grammont Lesparre.

General Fayolle was doubtful about the idea of supporting advancing Infantry by machine gun fire, but in view of the results obtained by the Canadians he was quite willing that the method should be tried. A Battalion of Infantrymen was deployed and ordered to advance at a scheduled speed, under cover of indirect machine gun fire.

This test was very satisfactory: two men had their hands scratched by bullets which had met and deflected one each other. The resulting bruises were of no importance.

General Fayolle was delighted and said, "Well, you must give us another proof of the possibilities of well applied machine gun fire. In front of us we have a position which we have taken and lost several times. Please; Grammont, try to take it without the help of any artillery."

The attack was carried out very successfully, the position captured without losses and, an far an I know, held henceforth.

Clearly, the French Army was now convinced. Several Machine Gun Schools were organised. The necessary hand books were written, printed and distributed within three months.

[Staffsyeoman]

I think this is a case of disparate strands of an overall 'truth'.

Baker-Carr somewhat glosses over the depth of the relationship between him, Brutinell and Lindsay - and the mid-war spat between them.

I would say without a shadow of a doubt that Brutinell was a brilliant organiser and enabler - and a tactician. But (and I'm generalising to the point of giddiness here) Lindsay and Baker-Carr very much considered the specialist Machine Gun Corps to be their idea. There was the disagreement over the origin of the development of machine gun barrage fire (which Brutinel felt he had invented, but was usurped by Lindsay and Baker-Carr). They were eventually reconciled, that seems apparent, but precisely how, is not.

The references to Ironside are intriguing. I knew of his connection to the Canadian Corps, but gained the impression that he was not happy there; likewise, he was Commandant of the Machine Gun School at the beginnig of the 1918 March Offensive and did valuable work in gathering up the staff and instructors and deploying them as a vital reserve. I do not believe, however, that this command gave him any residual affection for the MGC; he makes quite groundless remarks about them in his book 'Archangel'.

[Borden Battery]

Thank you for your contribution - we are hoping to research and establish factual information from all other sources which can be used to corroborate or debunk the statements in this late-in-life series of interviews of Brutinel.

In the following excerpt from the Brutinel Tapes, Brutinel makes reference to the Russo-Japanese War and the employment of massed machine gun tactics here. There is also an extensive chapter in the book "The Canadian Emma Gees" (1938) regarding the Japanese employment of massed machine guns and what could have been some of the first use of indirect fire. Brutinel makes reference to this 1938 work in other sources and was probably consulted in its writing.

We have also tracked down at least one Canadian military attache that was able to observe some of these actions and filed some confidential reports from Japan. Therefore, it is likely Brutinel has some prior knowledge of the used of massed machine guns. At this time I have information which outlines how he took this concept and tested and documented the impacts in much greater detail. This lead to manuals and standard operating procedures. Did the Canadians train the British - interesting question that we are trying to prove or disprove. More background on the personalities involved is most welcome. The "recorded" history is not necessarily the "true" history.

The CEF Study Group is currently acquiring some 900 pages from some very rare documents on the history of the Canadian Machine Gun Corps and more information should be forthcoming over the next 6-18 months.

Borden Battery

=========================================================

TAPE 1.

Interviewer:

What led to the formation of the Canadian Motor Machine Gun Brigade?

Reply:

I have very often been asked to relate the circumstances which led to my joining the Canadian Expeditionary Forces and consequently to the formation of the First Canadian Machine Gun Brigade.

I have done so verbally many times but I feel that this simple story should be told again and recorded, as it is really the starting point of a great adventure, the multiple phases of which could not be foreseen in August 1914.

-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-

I had been a close student of the Russo-Japanese War of 1904 and had been struck with the great fire power of the Machine Gun when employed in sufficient numbers by resolute men, well trained. I deplored the systematic ignorance of the qualities of these weapons shown by the French General Staff and also by the British General Staff, although with the light Vickers machine gun the British had the best machine gun available at the time - and, as far as I know, still unsurpassed.

... remainder edited and not related ... [see the CEF Study Group site for full transcript]

[Borden Battery]

Here is a well-known website which has finally been added to the CEF Study Group's list of Recommended Great War websites .... Borden Battery

The Vickers Machine Gun . . . . Feb 2006

At present this is the premier website regarding the Vickers Machine Gun was used by most units in the BEF, CEF, AIF and ANZACS. This website includes a specialized discussion forum, information on the machine gun, machine gunner training, detailed training manuals and photographs. The British Mk. I .303" Vickers Machine Gun was introduced into the British Army on the 26th of November, 1912 by List Of Changes 16217. This was the beginning of its long life with the British Army. It was finally declared obsolete on the 7th of March, 1968. A Richard Fisher Website.

http://www.vickersmachinegun.org.uk/

[Richard Fisher]

Thank you very much for that promotion, as mentioned in e-mail, I am in the process of uploading a manual containing information on the Colt Machine Gun which I am sure will be of interest to Canadian researchers.

Furthermore, I will be updating the site extensively this year with more information on the use of the gun by different units and I ask readers to be patient while this takes place.

Once again, many thanks,

Richard Fisher

[snavek]

I had thought that Panet replaced Ironside on 7 January 1918 (LG 6/3/18) because the Canadians wanted their own officers in charge. Perhaps the above explains why Ironside was made Commandant of the Small Arms School (LG 15/2/18) (or Machine Gun Corps. School, Camiers-depending what you read). He had the credentials to galvanise the differing factions having been GSO1 of 4th Canadians since they were raised in 1916.

Keith

[Borden Battery]

Hello Richard

As you update and add to your Vickers Machine Gun website, please keep us informed. We will revise our Recommended Great War Website list for the benefit of our readers.

Regards

Borden Battery

[Borden Battery]

Hello Keith

20 February 2006

Any more information on Gen. Ironside and the transfer would be appreciated. We are currently going through a number of obscure documents and reports to support and/or critque any of the comments by Brutinel in these tapes.

Regards

Borden Battery

[snavek]

I can't add a lot more about Ironside on this subject. The 4th Canadian's War Diary records Operational Order No. 75 having been issued by him on Christmas Day, 1917 and I could find nothing from him after this.

The London Gazette entries I mentioned previously give the next clue:

(1). Dated 15th February, 1918. Comdt. Small Arms School, w.e.f. 7th January,1918. (Graded for purposes of pay as a GSO, 1st Grade), Bt.

Lt.Col. W. E. Ironside, DSO, RA and to be Temp. Colonel whilst so employed vice Bt. Lt.Col. Sir W. I. A. Kay, Bt., DSO, K R Rifle C.

(2). Dated 6th March, 1918. w.e.f. 7th January, 1918. Lt.Col. W. E. Ironside, CMG, DSO, RA, GSO1 relinquished post to T./Lt.Col. E. de B. Panet,CMG, DSO,Canadian Artillery.

The reference to the Machine Gun Corps. School, Camiers was listed on another website and I've not been able to research the validity of it or if the two were linked.

Six days after the Spring offensive began it seems he was on the move again: London Gazette dated 26th April, 1918. w.e.f. 27th March, 1918. Attd. to Hd. Qr. Units:-Brig.-Comdr.-and to be temp. Brig-Gen. whilst so employed: Bt. Lt.Col. (Temp. Col.) W. E. Ironside, CMG, DSO, RA.

Reading 'Archangel' and his two diaries I didn't pick up that he was unhappy with his time with the Canadians. He was disappointed that he didn't get a field command when he was transferred to them from the 6th Div., but with the one exception that was something that continued for his 40 years service. As GSO1 he was with 4th Canadians through Vimy and Passchendaele, his photograph appeared in the American and Canadian Press after Vimy when he was referred to as a Canadian Officer (if anyone has a copy of a photo of him with his English Bull Terrier 'Gibby' wearing Ironside's ?Mons Star on his collar, I'd love a copy!).

Keith

[Borden Battery]

Thanks. Will follow up on this information as well.

Borden Battery