CONTENTS
| PAGE | |
| Introduction | [v] |
| 42nd (East Lancashire) Division. First Line | [1] |
| 43rd (Wessex Division), First Line. 44th (Home Counties Division), First Line. 45th (Wessex) Division, Second Line | [15] |
| 46th (North Midland) Division. First Line | [21] |
| 47th (London) Division, Formerly 2nd London. First Line | [29] |
| 48th (South Midland) Division. First Line | [41] |
| 49th (West Riding) Division. First Line | [51] |
| 50th (Northumbrian) Division. First Line | [59] |
| 51st (Highland) Division. First Line | [75] |
| 52nd (Lowland) Division. First Line | [91] |
| 53rd (Welsh) Division. First Line | [109] |
| 54th (East Anglian) Division. First Line | [121] |
| 55Th (West Lancashire) Division. First Line | [129] |
| 56th (London) Division, Formerly 1st London. First Line | [141] |
| 57th (West Lancashire) Division. Second Line | [151] |
| 58th (1st London) Division. Second Line | [155] |
| 59th (North Midland) Division. Second Line | [165] |
| 60th (2nd London) Division. Second Line | [169] |
| 61st (South Midland) Division. Second Line | [179] |
| 62nd (West Riding) Division. Second Line | [187] |
| 66th (East Lancashire) Division. Second Line | [195] |
| Appendix | [203] |
THE
TERRITORIAL DIVISIONS
42ND (EAST LANCASHIRE) DIVISION
First Line
The Division sailed for Egypt on September 10th, 1914, at a time when sanguine people thought that the only rôle of the Territorial Force would be to provide garrisons for our outlying Dependencies. It was the first Territorial division to leave Britain.
While in Egypt the Division supplied part of the Canal Defence Force, the Artillery and Engineers of the Division being engaged in February 1915, when the Turkish attack on the Canal was driven off. See despatches from Sir A. Wilson, C.B., dated 11th February, 1915, and 1st August, 1915. In the former, paragraph 37, the 19th Lancashire Battery R.F.A., T.F., was said to have rendered excellent service.
During the six months following their arrival in Egypt, the Division did much hard marching and training of all kinds.
At the beginning of May 1915 the Division embarked for the Dardanelles, and the Lancashire Fusilier Brigade, the 125th, disembarked on 5th May (see Sir Ian Hamilton’s despatch of 20th May) in time to take part in the sanguinary fighting, 6th-10th May, now called the Second Battle of Krithia.
In his despatch of 26th August, 1915, Sir Ian Hamilton describes the struggle. Our tired troops had to attack formidable opposing lines, the enemy being well entrenched. The Brigade was attached temporarily to the 29th Division. A certain amount of progress was made on the 6th May. On the 7th at 3 p.m. the two brigades on the left, Lancashire Fusilier Brigade and 88th Brigade, were held up, but a general attack of the whole line ordered for 4.45 p.m. gained ground. Heavy counter-attacks were delivered till dawn on the 10th, these were repulsed. On the 11th the 42nd, which had completed its disembarkation on the 9th, relieved the 29th Division, now worn out after eighteen days’ hard fighting. Shortly after this the Force settled down to what was practically siege warfare.
During the latter half of May the 42nd Division worked night and day on a series of new fire and communication trenches in “no man’s land,” which brought their front line within assaulting distance. On 25th May the Royal Naval and 42nd Divisions crept 100 yards nearer to the Turks, and on the night of May 28th/29th the whole British Line made a further small advance.
Each night till 3rd/4th June attacks by the enemy were made on the new line, but these were repulsed.
A general assault was ordered for the 4th June. This is now the Third Battle of Krithia. Sir Ian said: “The Manchester Brigade of the 42nd Division advanced magnificently. In five minutes the first line of Turkish trenches was captured and by 12.30 p.m. the Brigade had carried with a rush the line forming their second objective, having made an advance of 600 yards in all. The working parties got to work without incident and the position here could not possibly have been better.”
Unfortunately the advance was not successful on the front of the 29th Division, on the left of the 42nd, while later there was a withdrawal of troops on the right. “The enfilade fire of the Turks began to fall upon the Manchester Brigade of the 42nd Division which was firmly consolidating the furthest distant line of trenches it had so brilliantly won. After 1.30 p.m. it became increasingly difficult for this gallant Brigade to hold its ground, heavy casualties occurred, the Brigadier and many other officers were wounded or killed, yet it continued to hold out with the greatest tenacity and grit. Every effort was made to sustain the Brigade in its position, its right flank was thrown back to make face against the enfilade fire.... It became clear that unless the right of our line could advance again it would be impossible for the Manchesters to maintain the very pronounced salient in which they now found themselves.” Eventually “By 6.30 p.m. therefore the 42nd Division had to be extricated with loss from the second line Turkish trenches and had to content themselves with consolidating on the first line which they had captured within five minutes of commencing the attack. Such was the spirit displayed by this Brigade that there was great difficulty in persuading the men to fall back. Had their flanks been covered nothing would have made them loosen their grip.... About 400 prisoners were taken in the attack. The majority of these captures were made by the 42nd Division under Major-General W. Douglas.”
The Division was not heavily engaged in the battles of 28th June and 12th-13th July.
The despatch of 11th December, 1915, contains an account of the Suvla Bay fighting and of certain operations undertaken on 6th-8th August at Helles to contain the enemy there. The 29th Division was to attack about 1200 yards of front and the 42nd was asked to capture two trenches. The Turks were found “full of fight.” The 29th did not progress. “Two resolute separate attacks were made by the 42nd Division but both of these recoiled in face of the unexpected volume of fire developed by the Turks.” The reason was that our attack and one by the Turks had almost coincided and the enemy trenches were full of men.
On August 7th the attack was renewed and there was again very heavy fighting. “In the centre a stiff battle raged all day up and down a vineyard.... A large portion of the vineyard had been captured in the first dash and the East Lancashire men in this part of the field stood their ground against a succession of vigorous counter-attacks. The enemy suffered very severely in these counter-attacks which were launched in strength and at short intervals.... Owing to the fine endurance of the 6th and 7th Battalions of the Lancashire Fusiliers it was found possible to hold the vineyard through the night, and a massive column of the enemy which strove to overwhelm their thinned ranks was shattered to pieces in the attempt.... For two more days the troops (42nd Division) were called upon to show their qualities of vigilance and power of determined resistance, for the enemy had by no means yet lost hope of wresting from us the ground we had won in the vineyard. This unceasing struggle was a supreme test for battalions already exhausted by 48 hours’ desperate fighting, and weakened by the loss of so many good leaders and men, but the peculiar grit of the Lancastrians was equal to the strain, and they did not fail. Two specially furious counter-attacks were delivered by the Turks on the 8th August, one at 4.40 a.m., and another at 8.30 p.m., where again our bayonets were too much for them. Throughout the night they made continuous bomb attacks, but the 6th Lancashire Fusiliers and the 4th East Lancashire Regiment stuck gamely to their task at the eastern corner of the vineyard. There was desperate fighting also at the northern corner, where the personal bravery of Lieutenant W. T. Forshaw, 1/9th Manchester Regiment, who stuck to his post after his detachment had been relieved, an act for which he has since been awarded the V.C., was largely instrumental in the repulse of three very determined onslaughts.”
By the morning of August 9th “things were quieter and the sorely tried troops were relieved.” The fighting, 6th to 13th August, is now officially the “Actions of Krithia Vineyard.”
The Division, which was now at little more than one-third of its establishment, received a reinforcement of dismounted yeomen in September. It was incidentally mentioned in Sir C. C. Monro’s despatch of 6th March, 1916, regarding the evacuation of Helles, as being, in December 1915, badly in need of rest. The losses of the Division on the Peninsula, killed, wounded and missing, the last being mostly killed, exceeded 8000.
After the evacuation, 8th January, 1916, the Division had a short stay at Mudros and was then taken to Egypt.
In Sir A. Murray’s despatch of 1st October, 1916, dealing with operations east of the Canal, he stated that of the East Lancashire troops commanded by Major-General Sir W. Douglas, only two battalions were in action on the 4th August, now the Battle of Rumani, when the Turks were driven back with heavy loss, but he said that the force carried out a march under very trying conditions on the subsequent days.
At no time during their long war-service did the Division experience a greater physical strain than on this march. The 52nd on the left were nearer the coast, with its sea air, and on the whole had harder going. The two brigades of the 42nd were wading and struggling in loose desert sand while the heat was intense. Very many men collapsed. Sir A. Murray in the despatch, paragraph 5, said: “Vigorous action, to the utmost limits of endurance was ordered for the 5th August and the troops, in spite of the heat, responded nobly.” Certainly the sufferings of the 127th Brigade on the 5th and 6th bounded on the limits of human endurance. The 125th had slightly better ground and a shorter distance. The 126th was in reserve.
The Division, along with the 52nd, alternately formed the advance guard, in co-operation with mounted troops, until the railhead reached El Arish, when it returned to Kantara. Before the end of February 1917 it had embarked at Alexandria for France.
After being re-equipped the Division as part of the III. Corps, Fourth Army, entered the line in the Epéhy district and thereafter held a sector about Havrincourt until 8th July, when they went out for rest and training in the back area of the Third Army, about the ground of the First Battle of the Somme.
In September 1917, the Division took over from the 15th in the Third Battle of Ypres, in the area of the Fifth Army. On 6th September they assaulted several fortified farms, but, in consequence of a little hill on the left being still in the enemy’s possession, they failed to make much progress. Their losses were heavy, partly because the Division was so persistent in their pursuit of a success. During the following days they had further fighting.
On the 26th the Division relieved the 66th in the Coastal Sector at Nieuport. When relieved there by a French unit in November the 42nd moved to Givenchy. There they constructed many concrete defence works which earned the gratitude and praise of the 55th when the Lys battle opened on 9th April, 1918. See 55th Division.
When, early in 1918, brigades were reduced to three battalions, any surplus of men or of experience was transferred to the second line division, the 66th, a gift which was to be of inestimable value during the terrible fighting the 66th endured in the March Retreat.
About 23rd March, 1918, the 42nd were “bused” to the Arras-Bapaume area to assist in arresting the great German offensive. On the 24th they entered the line about Ervillers, and now had fighting of the most trying description; the flanks being often “in the air,” partly because divisions which had been in the battle since its commencement on the 21st were almost worn to the bone.
In a supplementary despatch of 23rd April, 1918, as to the work of different divisions, Sir Douglas Haig said: “In fierce fighting at end of March and early in April around Bucquoy and Ablainzevelle the 42nd (East Lancashire) Division (T.) and 62nd (West Riding) Division (T.) beat off many attacks and contributed greatly to the successful maintenance of our line in this important sector.”
In Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 20th July, 1918, as to the March Retreat, paragraph 33, Third Army front, he said: “A counter-attack by the 42nd Division, under Major-General A. Solly-Flood (on 25th March) drove the enemy out of Sapignies,” and notwithstanding that the Germans maintained great pressure and made many attacks, the 42nd Division at end of the day held Ervillers “where the 1/10th Battalion Manchester Regiment, 42nd Division, had repulsed eight attacks.” The fighting 24th/25th March is now the “First Battle of Bapaume, 1918.” Paragraph 42, as to the 26th-27th March: “Elsewhere all his assaults were heavily repulsed by troops of the 62nd, 42nd and Guards Divisions.”
Paragraph 45 deals with the great attack on 28th March, now officially the “First Battle of Arras, 1918,” when the fighting was “of the utmost intensity.” “On the southern portion of his attack the enemy’s repulse was, if possible, even more complete than on the new front east of Arras.... The 42nd Division drove off two attacks from the direction of Ablainzevelle.”
The worst was over and the line now stabilised, but on the 5th and 6th April the enemy launched very heavy attacks in the neighbourhood where the 42nd were holding the line. See also 47th Division. These new attacks were also repulsed. This is now the “Battle of the Ancre, 1918.”
In the History of the 42nd Division by Mr. F. P. Gibbon (Country Life Office, London, 1921, price 6s. 6d.) there is quoted an order by the Commander of the IV. Corps, Sir G. M. Harper, in which he said: “The Corps Commander congratulates 42nd Division on their magnificent behaviour during the last few days of fighting. Numerous heavy attacks have been made by the enemy and have been completely repulsed with heavy loss, and the capture of prisoners and machine-guns. He heartily thanks the troops for their courage and endurance, and is confident that they will continue to hold the line against all attacks.”
The Divisional Commander also issued a special order congratulating the Division on their “magnificent work,” and subsequently in his farewell order, dated 18th March, 1919, after referring to the Division being hurried in buses “to help in stemming the great enemy offensive,” he said: “This it effectually did in an epic battle, in a manner which has earned for it undying fame.... For seventeen consecutive days it remained in action, and held its ground in a manner that cannot be surpassed by the performance of any troops in any period of history.”
Mr. Gibbon states the losses of the Division between 24th March and 8th April at 2963. He makes it clear that on no occasion did the Division retire except under orders.
Throughout the summer the Division, with brief intervals, held the line about Gommecourt and Hebuterne, and when the Third Army attacked, on 21st August, the Division advanced through Serre.
The supplementary despatch of 13th September, 1918, said: “The 42nd Division, which, in the latter days of March, fought with great gallantry north of Bapaume, took part in the attack launched by us on the 21st August and in spite of obstinate resistance by the enemy captured Miraumont. During the following days it had heavy fighting on a number of occasions but, before the end of the month, reached and captured Riencourt-lez-Bapaume.”
This good work was again referred to in the despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraph 21 of which shows that at 4.55 a.m. on 21st August the IV. and V. Corps of the Third Army attacked, the 42nd Division being in the assaulting troops of the IV. Corps. “The enemy’s foremost defences were carried rapidly and without difficulty.”
The fighting 21st-23rd August is now officially designated the “Battle of Albert, 1918.” Paragraph 22 deals with the fighting on 23rd and 24th August. “Miraumont, which for three days had resisted our attacks, was taken by the 42nd Division (Major-General A. Solly-Flood) with many prisoners and, pressing forward, the same Division seized Pys.”
Mr. Gibbon states that between 21st August and 6th September the Division took 1261 prisoners and 24 guns, and their casualties were 253 killed and 1305 wounded.
The fighting 31st August-3rd September is now the “Second Battle of Bapaume.”
During the remainder of the “Advance to Victory,” the 42nd alternated with the New Zealand Division in one of the two divisional sections of the IV. Corps.
On 27th September the Division attacked and broke through the portion of the old Hindenburg line between Havrincourt and Beaucamp. After two days’ unceasing fighting they were able to claim over 1700 prisoners and nine field guns. Their own losses were about 1000.
In paragraph 35 of the despatch “The Battle of Cambrai and the Hindenburg line, 27th September-5th October,” Sir Douglas Haig remarked: “The attack proceeded according to plan from the commencement. On the right strong resistance was encountered at Beaucamp. Several strong counter-attacks were made during the day in this neighbourhood, but in spite of them troops of the 5th and 42nd Divisions successfully established the right flank of our attack between Beaucamp and Ribecourt.”
The fighting 27th September-1st October is now officially designated the “Battle of the Canal du Nord,” and that on 8th-9th October is the “Battle of Cambrai, 1918.”
During the latter period the Division was resting about Havrincourt Wood but re-entered the line on the 12th.
On 20th October at 2 a.m. the Third Army and a portion of the First Army made an attack on the line of the Selle river, north of Le Cateau. On this occasion the Division carried all its four objectives. The despatch, paragraph 46, deals with the “Battle of the Selle,” and states: “On this occasion also the enemy’s resistance was serious, and he had been able to erect wire entanglements along the greater part of the line. Our advance was strongly contested at every point, frequent counter-attacks being made. Supported by a number of Tanks which had successfully crossed the river, our infantry after severe fighting ... gained their objectives on the high ground east of the Selle, pushing out patrols as far as the river Harpies.”
Paragraph 47 described another assault made on the 23rd October, in which the 42nd is included among the attacking troops. “At the end of the day the western outskirts of the Forêt de Mormal had been reached.”
Both on the 20th and the 23rd there was much bitter and often hand-to-hand fighting. The 42nd had as its opponents a crack German division, fresh from reserve, the 25th and part of another, and success was only attained by a fine exhibition of skilful tactics and great fearlessness on the part of the troops. The Divisional R.E. did particularly well at the crossing of the Selle.
The map opposite page 294 of Messrs. Dent’s edition of Sir Douglas Haig’s Despatches shows that the 42nd Division was among the troops employed at the Battle of the Sambre, commencing 4th November. The Division took over from the New Zealand Division in the Forêt de Mormal and, becoming the spear-head of the IV. Corps, kept up the pressure. This was a task of very great difficulty as the roads through the Forest had been mined and otherwise destroyed, and off the roads, owing to continued rain, the ground was a morass. In the words of a Special Order by the G.O.C. Division they “forced the passage of the bridgeless River Sambre in face of severe enemy fire and captured Hautmont.”
On Armistice day the Division was just east of the Maubeuge-Avesnes road.
All through the “Advance to Victory” the work of the 42nd was up to the very high standard they themselves had set in Gallipoli in 1915, and unofficial writers have uniformly referred to their services in that Advance in terms of the highest praise.
In the Farewell Order before referred to Major-General Solly-Flood said: “From the 21st August until the Armistice on 11th November it played a continuous part in the great offensive. We can with reason be proud of the Division’s share in that fighting. Its record includes an advance of 64 miles during which it fought in 12 general actions—each of several days’ duration. Its captures include 18 towns and villages, over 4,000 prisoners, 37 guns of all calibre, 122 trench mortars, 455 machine guns and much other valuable booty.
“Early in 1918 I set the Division a motto: ‘Go one better,’ believing the spirit it expressed would always carry them to success. It has invariably acted up to that motto, and it is my pride to be able to say that never has the Division been called upon to undertake an operation in which it did not succeed, and never was it set a task which it did not more than accomplish.”
These are the words of a friendly critic but they are something more than “faint praise.” To have so thoroughly satisfied a Regular officer of the standing of their Commander meant service of great merit.
The foregoing account had been written and, like a number of those which follow, had been gone over by a senior officer of the Division before Mr. Gibbon’s History of the 42nd was published, but the losses and certain other details concerning 1918 are as given by Mr. Gibbon. His chronicle gives a full account of the March battle and of the last Advance, and claims which he makes, such as that the losses of the Division were increased because it attained its objectives up to time and while its flanks were uncovered, are substantiated by other authorities.
43RD (WESSEX) DIVISION. First Line
44TH (HOME COUNTIES) DIVISION. First Line
45TH (WESSEX) DIVISION. Second Line
These three divisions sailed for the East early in the war, chiefly in September 1914, and were among the first Territorial units to leave Britain. As regards being mentioned in despatches as divisional units they were unfortunate, no such references having been made, but their services to the Empire were, nevertheless, very great.
It has been suggested that if these three divisions had been sent to France when they went East, two months’ intensive training would have fitted them to be of use in the First Battle of Ypres, certainly they might have been veterans before the Second. They would have stood the climatic conditions much better than the two Indian divisions, and a vast amount of shipping might have been saved. Probably political reasons demanded that a representation from India should appear on the Western Front, while, as Mr. Churchill said on 1st April, 1919, the Territorial Force was, in many quarters, hardly regarded seriously as a military factor before the Great War.
The public has learned that over 20,000 Territorials were still in India in the beginning of 1919 and were not relieved until the close of that year. Throughout the war, and for a year after the Armistice, the garrison of India was largely composed of these divisions, but units of all three saw much heavy fighting in various theatres. It should be remembered also that facilities for leave did not exist in the East.
Doubtless imperious necessity compelled the breaking up of these divisions, and the sending of a battalion in one direction and its sister units in others.
In the despatches from India and Mesopotamia one misses that appreciation, so freely given by Sir John French to even individual battalions of the Territorial Force in the early stages of the war on the western front, and in these Eastern despatches the letters T.F. are not appended to the names of battalions. In Lists of Mention, however, this omission is remedied.
In Sir John Nixon’s despatch of 1st January, 1916, thirty-five officers and men of the Hampshire Regiment, T.F., were mentioned for good services on the Euphrates, 26th June to 25th July, 1915.
About the close of 1915 and early in 1916 the 1/4th Hampshire Regiment, 1/4th Somersetshire Light Infantry and 1/4th Devonshire Regiment, all of the 43rd, and 1/5th Royal West Surrey and 1/5th East Kent Regiments of the 44th Division were in the Mesopotamia Army and had heavy casualties. Some of the 43rd Division were actually in Kut when it was besieged and were taken prisoners on the surrender of General Townshend’s force. Other battalions of these three divisions sent drafts from India to Mesopotamia, which were, for the most part, attached to Regular regiments.
Officers and other ranks of the 4th East Kent, 4th Devons, 6th Devons, and 2/5th Hampshire were mentioned in General Maude’s last despatch.
In September 1918, the 1/4th Hampshire of the 43rd was serving in a force which was operating in Transcaspia.
There was published by the War Office on 13th January, 1920, a list of names, brought forward by Lieut.-General W. R. Marshall, K.C.B., for distinguished and gallant services with the Mesopotamia Expeditionary Force; the following units are represented in it:
| 43rd Division | 1/4th and 1/6th Devonshire |
| 1/4th Somersetshire Light Infantry | |
| 1/4th and 1/6th Hampshire | |
| 1/4th Dorsetshire | |
| 44th Division | 1/5th Royal West Surrey |
| 1/5th East Kent | |
| 1/5th East Surrey | |
| 1/5th Royal West Kent | |
| 1/9th Middlesex | |
| 45th Division | 2/7th Hampshire |
| 2/6th Devonshire |
The 1/5th Duke of Cornwall’s Light Infantry, originally of the 43rd, were Pioneers to the 61st Division in France in March 1918, and a successful counter-attack by the battalion is referred to in paragraph 31 of Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 20th July, 1918.
The 1/7th and 1/8th Middlesex of the 44th served throughout most of the war with the 56th London Division in France. The 1/7th was selected for the Army of the Rhine.
The 2/4th Royal West Surrey, the 2/10th Middlesex and the 2/4th Royal West Kent of the 67th, Second Line, Home Counties Division, served with the 53rd, Welsh, Division and saw much fighting at Suvla Bay, Gallipoli, and in Palestine. Latterly the 2/4th West Surrey was in France, and was selected for the Army of the Rhine.
Sir A. Wilson’s despatch of 1st March, 1916, deals with operations in Western Egypt at the close of 1915, and the beginning of 1916. He mentions the 2/7th and 2/8th Middlesex, of the 67th Division, as forming part of the force employed.
When in April 1918 the 52nd Division and other troops were taken from Palestine to France certain units of these divisions were brought to Palestine and along with the Indian troops were engaged in the last victorious operations in that sphere. Among the mentions by Sir E. Allenby for good work in Palestine, March to September 1918, the following battalions are represented:
| 43rd Division | 1/4th Duke of Cornwall’s Light Infantry |
| 1/5th Somersetshire Light Infantry | |
| 1/4th and 1/5th Devonshire Regiment | |
| 1/4th Wiltshire Regiment | |
| 45th Division | 2/5th Hampshire Regiment |
| 2/4th Dorset Regiment |
The 1/5th Devonshire of the 43rd and the 2/4th Hampshire of the 45th joined the 62nd Division in France in June 1918 and were with it until the Armistice. When the 62nd was with the French Army on the Ardre, upon the east side of the salient between the Aisne and the Marne, in July 1918, these two battalions did work which was highly spoken of and quite worthy of the famous division to which they were attached. They gained a large number of awards in the last five months’ fighting. This remark applies particularly to the 2/4th Hampshire, the number of whose awards for work in France was quite exceptional. As to the 62nd Division, see The West Riding Territorials in the Great War, Kegan Paul and Co. Both the above battalions were chosen for the Army of Occupation.
The official lists issued by the War Office in November 1920 showed that awards were gained by a non-commissioned officer of the 1/4th East Kent for valuable service when with the Baluchistan Force, and by men of the 1/4th and 1/7th Hampshire for gallant service when with the Waziristan Force as late as 25th May, 1919.
For the Armies of Occupation there were chosen: Mesopotamia, the 1/5th East Kent, 1/5th Royal West Kent and 1/5th East Surrey of the 44th, and the 1/4th Dorsetshire of the 43rd. For Persia the 1/4th Hampshire of the 43rd. For Egypt the 1/4th Wiltshire and 1/5th Somerset Light Infantry of the 43rd, while the 1/8th Hampshire was also selected for Egypt and the 1/9th (Cyclists) for Siberia.
Although they were never operating as divisions the units from Wessex and the Home Counties can at least count themselves as very “far travelled.”
46TH (NORTH MIDLAND) DIVISION
First Line
This Division sailed for France in February 1915. One brigade was in reserve at the Battle of Neuve Chapelle, 10th-13th March, see paragraph 4 of the despatch from Sir John French, dated 5th April, 1915. In that despatch, paragraph 9, Sir John French said: “Several T.F. Battalions were engaged in the most critical moments of the fighting which occurred in the middle of March and they acquitted themselves with the utmost credit.” He looked forward to the T.F. troops being employed as divisions and said: “These opinions are fully borne out by the results of the close inspection I have recently made of the North Midland Division under Major-General The Hon. Montague-Stuart-Wortley and the 2nd London Division (afterwards the 47th) under Major-General Barter.”
This generous appreciation gave great encouragement not only to those of the Force in France, but to those who were then preparing themselves to go abroad, as well as to those who were working for the Territorial Force at home.
The Division spent the next six months in front of Neuve Église and in the Ypres salient, and at times had sharp fighting. It was involved in the first “Flammenwerfer” attack but stood its ground and repelled the enemy.
The 46th Division is mentioned in Sir John French’s last despatch dated 31st July, 1916, as having on 13th October, 1915, taken part in an attack on the Hohenzollern Redoubt and Fosse 8, near Loos. The Division retook the redoubt, but as they could make no progress up the trenches to Fosse 8, and as the Redoubt was commanded from Fosse 8, they were pressed back to the west edge of the Redoubt where they made a defensive line.
See also an authorised account by the Press Association Correspondent written on 24th November, 1915, who was then able to stand on the part captured and look back over the glacis crossed by the Division, who had done all that the bravest could do.
The Division was, in December 1915, ordered to Egypt; two brigades had arrived there when the move was countermanded and, in February 1916, it was concentrated in the Arras district, where it took over a sector hitherto held by our French allies.
Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 23rd December, 1916, which deals with the Somme battle, paragraph 8 (Dent’s edition), shows that the 46th and 56th Divisions, VII. Corps, Third Army, made a subsidiary attack at Gommecourt on 1st July, 1916. “The subsidiary attack at Gommecourt also forced its way into the enemy’s positions; but there met with such vigorous opposition that, as soon as it was considered that the attack had fulfilled its object, our troops were withdrawn.”
The losses of both the 46th and 56th Divisions were very heavy. None of the other divisions operating north of La Boisselle succeeded in consolidating the ground gained on 1st July. At that part of the line the enemy seems to have expected the attack and had made the most ample preparation to meet it. The efforts of these divisions, however, certainly contributed to the success of those further south.
In March 1917, when there were signs of a German retreat, the Division was about Bucquoy, as part of the II. Corps, and at times had sharp fighting and considerable losses. Thereafter they were taken to the north of Arras, where they were when the Battle of Arras opened on 9th April.
The despatch of 25th December, 1917, paragraph 36, Dent’s edition, deals with “Minor Operations” in the Lens area and states: “Substantial progress was made in this area on the 5th and 19th June, and five days later North Midland troops (46th Division, Major-General W. Thwaites) captured an important position on the slopes of a small hill south-west of Lens, forcing the enemy to make a considerable withdrawal on both sides of the river.” On 28th June an attack was made by the 46th Division and the 3rd and 4th Canadian Divisions on a front of two and a half miles astride the Souchez river. “All our objectives were gained,” and 300 prisoners taken.
At that time the Division was in the I. Corps. Sir A. Conan Doyle states that when they were taken out on 2nd July, after ten weeks’ continuous service in the line, none of the battalions were more than 300 strong. The tasks set to their neighbours, the Canadians, and to the 46th involved almost constant fighting, many strong positions being assaulted between the middle of April and the end of June.
The Division remained in the Lens-Givenchy area for many months. They were frequently engaged about Givenchy when the enemy made his great effort in that district in April 1918 (see 55th Division). They took part in the first advance eastward which began at the end of August. In September they were relieved and taken south where on the 19th they joined the IX. Corps, Fourth Army, and they remained in it till the battle of one hundred days was closed by the Armistice.
In Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraph 36, “The Hindenburg Line broken,” 29th September, he said, “On the Fourth Army front the 46th Division (Major-General G. F. Boyd) greatly distinguished itself in the capture of Bellenglise. The village is situated in the angle of the Scheldt canal, which, after running in a southerly direction from Bellicourt, here bends sharply to the east towards the Le Tronquoy tunnel. Equipped with life-belts and carrying mats and rafts, the 46th Division stormed the western arm of the canal at Bellenglise and to the north of it, some crossing the canal on footbridges which the enemy was given no time to destroy, others dropping down the sheer sides of the canal wall, and having swum or waded to the far side, climbing up the farther wall to the German trench lines on the eastern bank. Having captured these trenches, the attacking troops swung to the right and took from flank and rear the German defences along the eastern arm of the canal, and on the high ground south of the canal, capturing many prisoners and German batteries in action before the enemy had had time to realise the new direction of the attack. So thorough and complete was the organisation for this attack, and so gallantly, rapidly and well was it executed by the troops, that this one division took on this day over 4000 prisoners and 70 guns.”
This feat of arms seems to be as fine as anything done in the whole course of the war.
The despatch as published in the Gazette speaks of the 32nd Division passing through the 46th and taking Lehaucourt and Magny La Fosse, but according to the history of the 46th[1] the 46th captured these villages which were within their objectives. The 32nd then passed through them at 5.30 p.m. and next day took Levergies. The error is corrected by a note on page 283 of Messrs. Dent’s Sir Douglas Haig’s Despatches.
A detailed account of the battle of 29th September is given by Major-General Sir Archibald Montgomery in his Story of the Fourth Army (Hodder and Stoughton). Towards the close of that account he says: “The success attending the operations of the IX. Corps was primarily due to the dash and determination with which the troops of the 46th Division pressed forward to their objective, and to the excellent leadership and initiative of the subordinate commanders. When their flanks were exposed, they exerted pressure where the enemy was weak and gave way, and only strengthened their flanks just sufficiently to safeguard them.”
The fighting 29th September-2nd October is now designated the “Battle of St. Quentin Canal.”
The Division captured Ramicourt and broke the Beaurevoir-Fonsomme line, after stiff fighting, on 3rd October—the “Battle of the Beaurevoir Line.”
One brigade, the 139th, was attached to the 6th Division, for an attack on 8th October when Mannequin Hill and other strong positions were captured. (Story of Fourth Army, pp. 194 and 195.)
The Division was in the line on 9th and 10th October during the “Battle of Cambrai, 1918,” when rapid progress was made until they were stopped at Riquerval Wood. They were again employed in the Battle of the Selle River, 17th-25th October, see paragraphs 37 and 46 of the despatch.
In his Breaking the Hindenburg Line, Major Priestley gives detailed accounts of the Battle of Ramicourt, 3rd October, and the Battle of Andigny or Riquerval, a phase of the Battle of the Selle, 17th and 18th October. He points out that on the 3rd, the 46th not only took Ramicourt but captured and cleared Montbrehain to the east of it, 1000 prisoners being taken in the latter place; but, in consequence of the Division on the left of the 46th having been held up, the latter had to withdraw from Montbrehain, establishing their line to the west of it. He also mentions that both on the 3rd and 17th/18th October, as well as in the preliminary actions between these dates, the enemy’s resistance was much more stubborn than at Bellenglise, where the crossing of the canal had probably upset all his calculations and temporarily knocked the heart out of him.
The IX. Corps took part in the “Battle of the Sambre,” 4th November, and continued to move forward till the 10th November. The 46th Division, which had been out at rest from 18th October till 1st November, on the night of the 4th relieved brigades of the 1st and 32nd Divisions and continued to press and pursue the enemy. On the evening of the 6th they entered Cartignies and on the 7th, in face of resistance, crossed the Petite Helpe. On the 8th they had crossed the La Capelle-Avesnes road and when the Armistice came the Division was east of Sains.
The 1/5th South Staffordshire was selected for the Army of the Rhine.