Vers une politique européenne de sécurité et de défense. Défis et opportunités

Jean Klein, Patrice Buffotot et Nicole Vilboux (Dir.)

Actes du Colloque organisé les 15-16 juin 2001 par le Centre de Relations Internationales et de Stratégie (Université de Paris 1) avec le concours de l’Institut des Hautes Etudes de Défense Nationale et du Ministère des Affaires étrangères

Commander cet ouvrage

À la mémoire de Pierre Dabezies (1925-2002),
fondateur des études stratégiques à l’Université de Paris I – Sorbonne

Table des matières

Présentation du Centre de Relations Internationales et de Stratégie (CRIS)

Les auteurs

Principaux sigles utilisés

Jean Klein – Introduction – Les chances et la signification d’une politique européenne commune

Pere Vilanova – À propos de quelques variables sur le nouvel horizon stratégique

I. La dimension politique : Quelle Europe veut-on construire ?

André Brigot – Les limites géographiques et politiques de l’Europe

Franck Orban – La neutralité et ses conséquences sur la défense commune européenne

II. La dimension militaire. Quel outil militaire pour quelles missions ?

Hervé Coutau-Bégarie – Unité et diversité des cultures stratégiques en Europe

Patrice Buffotot – La redéfinition des missions, doctrines et organisations des forces armées dans l’Europe des Quinze

Bernardo Ribeiro – Le rôle de l’arme nucléaire dans la mise en œuvre d’une PECSD

III. La dimension économique

Jean-Pierre Maury – L’effort européen de défense et ses implications budgétaires

Frédéric Eyriès – L’innovation technologique et ses perspectives européennes

Claude Serfati – L’industrie aérospatiale européenne : un exemple d’integration ?

IV. La mise en œuvre d’une stratégie d’inter­vention autonome

Henri Burgelin – Introduction

David Hanley – Le conflit du Kosovo : leçons tirées par les Alliés

Michèle Bacot-Decriaud – Les réformes institutionnelles et la capacité de l’Europe à gérer les crises

André Dumoulin – La force de réaction rapide euro­péenne et son articulation avec l’OTAN

Nicole Vilboux – Le débat sur la PESD aux États-Unis

Index des auteurs cités

Index thématique

Publié dans Uncategorized | Commentaires fermés sur Vers une politique européenne de sécurité et de défense. Défis et opportunités

Chapter Nine. A Memorial Remembered

 

On June 17, 2001, the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial was teeming with hundreds of people.  On this bright, beautiful day, the vividly festive scene was a busy one full of chatter, activity, and fanfare.  The usually empty grounds of the Memorial were filled with a large assortment of visitors: American, French, dignitaries, tourists, military personnel, and civilian attendees. 1

This was a special day for the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial.  Over forty American Congressmen and Senators, and a large gathering of French and American businessmen, had descended upon the Memorial to witness a special wreath laying ceremony and military flyover in celebration of the 85th Anniversary of the Lafayette Escadrille. 

Why all this attention 85 years after their inauguration? How did the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial become so crowded on this day, just years after such attempted ceremonies consisted of “just three people and a bugler?”

* * *

A few years ago, a U. S. Air Force Lieutenant General named Michael Moseley was taken to the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial while on a visit to France.  Taken by its beauty and its historical significance, he was appalled by its condition.  General Moseley could not believe that an important symbol of such a storied American unit had fallen into such disrepair and decided to take action.  He made it his personal mission to do something about the monument in order to restore the honor of the men it represented.  Under his impetus, and through the efforts of others, the Memorial would finally get some much-needed attention. 2

The events that were transpiring on this day of June 17, 2001, were a testimony of the General’s efforts.  On this particular day, however, General Gregory S. Martin, the USAF Europe Commander, was the military guest of honor, and in charge of the festivities designed to promote the honor of the Lafayette men.  His speech echoed General Moseley’s sentiments,

“Frankly, the condition of the monument does not meet the standards expected.  These airmen deserve our respect and care.  The problem is, as time marches on, the trust funds and the people who are conversant with the sacrifice, begin to disappear.  We are finding that out with the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial.” 3

Continuing, General Martin’s speech captured the essence of the Lafayette men and their importance to the USAF,

 “These men were our pioneers.  They were not just the forerunners of the Army Air Corps of World War II, but of the Air Force today.  This is where America first learned to fly aerial combat; they gave us our aviation war wings.  The bottom line is, we want the people who visit the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial to feel just as proud about the contributions of the airmen that rest here as they do about the contributions of those who rest back in the States.”  

The speech and the day’s celebrations were a success.  The ceremonies included a flyby of French and American aircraft, and an organized visit of the Memorial and its crypt for the Congressmen and Senators.  These efforts generated much interest.  The French Government subsequently raised $485,000 as a donation to the Lafayette Escadrille Foundation. 5 The American Legion, a volunteer veteran’s group from America, has pitched in an additional $25, 000. 6

But more importantly, the results of the June 17, ceremony proved to be a catalyst to American Government.  Congressman Russell Stearns from Florida, led the charge in Congress, and promoted the bill and legislation necessary to raise funds for the Escadrille Memorial.  He introduced legislation on September 19, 2001, to furnish the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial with $2 million in funds.  In detailed testimony to the members of Congress, Congressman Stearns talked about the Lafayette Escadrille men, telling their history while displaying pictures of the men.  He recounted the history of the Memorial, to include its problems over the years, and he presented actual photos of the damage to the crypt and to the Memorial itself.  In December of 2001, Congress approved the legislation and $2 million dollars were earmarked for the Memorial.  The legislation included the following house comments,

“It is the sense of Congress of the United States that it should continue to honor the U. S. aviators who lost their lives while flying for France during World War I by guaranteeing support funds to repair the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial in Marnes-la-Coquette, France.” 7 

This appropriation proved fundamental to the survival of the Memorial, since repairs were estimated to cost $2 million dollars (after the $485,000 pledge from the French).  One million will go to the restoration of the Memorial, and another million will go to replenishing the dwindling trust fund to maintain the Memorial and its grounds. 8

A promotional campaign for the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial has been started by the USAF.  Posters and brochures furnished by the Air Force History and Museum Program promote the refurbishment of the monument.  In a section of the brochure entitled “Keeping Faith with America’s Aviators: The International Effort to restore the Memorial,” it states that “restoring the Memorial to its full grandeur would be a fitting tribute to America’s first combat men.” 9

* * *

What exactly is planned for the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial? According to the  “Preconditions Study to the General Restoration” laid out in February 1999, by Pierre Antoine Gaiter, Chief Architect of Historic Monuments, Ministry of the Culture of the French Government, who will be the chief architect in charge of redesign, the restoration calls for three stages of repairs. 

Stage One: Waterproof the crypt, fix drains, restore and waterproof terrace and roof, make structural repairs to the crypt and double glass the stained glassed windows.

Stage Two: Restore and clean façade, cleaning and removal of deposits behind coffins in crypt, restoration of stucco to crypt.

Stage Three: Redo pavements, grade grounds and landscape. 10

In summary, the following reparations and repairs are necessary to improve the condition of the memorial:

n      Perform a hydrographic survey of the surrounding site and develop a ground water monitoring plan.

n      Reroute and canalize the adjacent stream.

n      Install a cutoff drain and impermeable wall upstream to prevent groundwater contact with the structure.

n      Analyze ground and rainwater quality to determine how it impacts the rate of deterioration of concrete and steel bars and develop methods to slow rate of deterioration.

n      Investigate the impact of lowering the ground water level especially as it may impact the specific hydrostatic conditions to which the foundation of the structure is subject.

n      Further investigate the structure integrity of the entire structure and especially the foundation.

n      Repair or replace pavements.

n      Landscape the grounds, repair the ground walkways, and plant desired trees and shrubbery to improve the look and well-being of the site. 11

A Reinvigorated Foundation

The Lafayette Escadrille Foundation has its headquarters at 34, avenue de New York, in the 16th Arrondissement in Paris.  The Foundation, in response to all of these recent goings-on, has appeared to experience a rebirth in spirit and life.  Mr. Russell Porter, the American Foundation President, and a colorful gentleman who appears to have stepped directly out of the 1920’s or 1930’s, is beside himself with happiness at the infusion of cash and renewed interest and support.  For over thirty years he has struggled to bring the attention due to the Lafayette men; he is overjoyed to see the renewed interest.  Also ecstatic is Colonel Jean P. Gillet, a dashing suave French man with a gravelly voice who is the French President of the Foundation and a former commander of the 2/4 Lafayette Escadrille.  His voice trembles with excitement at the thought of the planned reconstruction.  Meetings of the Foundation are lively and a renewed spirit is tangible and a sense of action accompanies this new found enthusiasm. 12 The Foundation is currently constructing its own Internet website, something that has not existed up till now.  The site will draw attention not only to the Memorial, but will serve as an educational site as well, containing biographical and historical information about the men and the unit.  A new promotional video has been filmed, and will be available on the website.  The multimedia approach brings the Foundation to the modern age, and it is hoped that it will entice and excite youth from both France and the United States about the Lafayette Escadrille. 13

General William Lescynski, the distinguished American gentleman currently in charge of the American Battle Monuments Commission, European Region, is also impressed by the recent efforts to support the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial.  He states there are over 700 monuments, memorial and plaques — of which 170 are privately funded – in France alone.  Many of these are forgotten and in disrepair.  There was a time in recent history that the ABMC was tempted to take over the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial, if necessary, since it had fallen so far into disrepair, but those days are now far behind.  Yet he knows that even though an important victory has been won, a long battle to rectify the situation remains.  The refurbishment of the Memorial will be difficult. 14

All agree however, that this is a grand start.

Resurrecting the Memory of the Lafayette Escadrille and Lafayette Flying Corps 

The author has presented the evidence that he believes has led to the Lafayette Escadrille and the Lafayette Flying Corps being forgotten over the years.  To speak on behalf of the American national psyche is nearly impossible, the author can only do his best to explain why he thinks the nation has not remembered the Lafayette Escadrille and why the unit has not resonated with American culture like other volunteer units have.  There are those who will argue that the unit has not been forgotten; indeed, the author ran into those contrary to his opinion.  But the majority of the people with whom the author came in contact, agreed that something was amiss.  Many librarians, researchers, and historians were intrigued by the premise. 

The evidence printed here can be summarized as follows.  The Lafayette Escadrille’s total number of victories was not outstanding by any measure; the record of 40 kills in 23 months of fighting, was eclipsed by many contemporary French, American and British units.  Furthermore, take away the monumental efforts by Lufbery and the unit’s record pales even further.  The total number of victories by the Lafayette Flying Corps, 199, was not a great amount either when it is compared to the overall victory total claimed by the Allies. 

The USAS completely failed to integrate the Lafayette Escadrille into its ranks.  The abrupt dispersal of the unit and its men, and the complete failure to carry on its history did more to damage the unit’s legacy then any other single act. 

To add to the pains of the disbanded unit, the discord, dissension, and distrust among its members, soured the Lafayette Escadrille’s men, and these men would fail to carry forward the unit’s legacy in the post war period, failed to carry on its traditions until too late, and did little to bolster and defend the unit’s name.  Though books were written and a movie made, other forces, like the “ringers,” detracted from the Lafayette’s glory and ruined its image.  None of its members went onto experience the fame of an Eddie Rickenbacker, a Billy Mitchell, or Teddy Roosevelt.  Without key household names, the men’s beacon dimmed.

The USAF also has failed to keep alive the spirit of the Lafayette Escadrille.  The squadron lineage has died off.   No monuments exist stateside to celebrate and honor the men.  There is no central collection of Lafayette memorabilia, nor are there any museums dedicated to their cause.  Its greatest ace and hero, Lufbery, has no marker, monument, or memorial anywhere in the States.  

All of these factors contributed to the Lafayette aviators’ fall into oblivion.   

* * *

The renewed interest displayed by the U. S. Government and the USAF in the fate of the Lafayette Escadrille is promising.  The important first step, to restore the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial to its former glory, has been undertaken.  An aggressive promotional campaign by the USAF in the United States is necessary to correctly memorialize the men.   

And it is never too late for the USAF to once and for all accept the Lafayette aviators as the true pioneers of American combat aviation.  Their history should be officially and carefully documented, and a single location dedicated to their memory should be established in the United States, where all can come to learn and pay tribute to these great men.  As Paul Rockwell once said, “I think that the youth of our country (America) could get a great deal of inspiration out of the study of the Lafayette Escadrille.” 15 The Lafayette men were unable to safeguard their legacy while alive.  Now that they are dead it is up to America to never let their story die.              

1.      Participation d’auteur.

2.      Entrevue avec l’Etat-major du Général le 16 mai 2001.

3.      Air Force Times, 17 juin 01.

4.      Ibid.

5.      Air Force Times, 18 juin 01.

6.      Site d’Internet de l’ « American Legion ».

7.      “Restoring the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial.” House Resolution 3004, 6 December 2001. 

8.      Budak, David, USAF Lafayette Escadrille Memorial Assessment Point Paper, 2001 

9.      Air Force History and Museums Program Brochure, 2001.

10.   Budak, USAF Assessment Point Paper.

11.  Ibid.

12.  L’auteur a été invite aux plusieurs réunions de la Fondation du Mémorial de l’Escadrille Lafayette.

13.  L’auteur a eu la chance de regarder le vidéo de la Fondation.  Il a aussi vu le site Internet proposé.

14.  Entrevue avec le Général.

15.  Rockwell, Interview : Paul Rockwell, p. 2.   

Publié dans Uncategorized | Commentaires fermés sur Chapter Nine. A Memorial Remembered

Chapter Eight. America’s Failure to Commemorate the Lafayette Aviators

Despite the fact that the Lafayette Escadrille and the Lafayette Flying Corps’ men were America’s first combat aviators, the USAF’s and American history have negligently ignored them.  As Charles Dolan put it, “The Lafayette Flying Corps, including the Lafayette Escadrille N-124, was and is the beginning and the backbone of the USAF, and not one word of its wonderful contribution exists.” 1 The Lafayette’s history was lost over time, and the lack of available USAF history on the subject has hampered the remembrance of America’s famed aviators.  To add to Charles Dolan’s sentiment, Lieutenant Colonel Bruce Freeman of the USAF, who studied the problem of the lack of the Escadrille’s lineage, adds, “More importantly, the first American fighter squadron ever committed to combat no longer exists!” 2

Although the first statement by Charles Dolan is only partially true, the latter statement is completely correct.  How can it be that America’s first combat aviators have not been properly held up for recognition and as examples for the rest of the USAF? In this author’s research through the aviation collections, research centers, and museums that exist in the United States, he came to a definite conclusion – none of the Lafayette Escadrille material is centrally located or sorted, and no organization has attempted to mass and gather the existing Lafayette material to one locale in order to tell the Lafayette’s story to the American public. 

The Lafayette Escadrille and the USAS History of World War I 

Serious attempts were made by the USAS during and after World War I to appropriately document the official history of its units and history.  “General Order Number 31,” from General Headquarters, AEF, dated February 16, 1918, “required all major subordinate AEF organizations to establish and supervise a historical section that would collect data and keep a war diary.” The Chief of Staff of the Air Service sent telegrams on November 19, 1918, to every Air Service Organization, directing each to prepare a history and to forward it to the Information Sections. But as Colonel Edgar S. Gorrell, the AEF Assistant Chief of Staff and the man appointed to oversee the official history of the USAS, noted, “the Zone of Action has no further interest in the war – getting home was their main priority.  Writing history does not appeal to them.” 3

The Lafayette Escadrille was officially reconstituted as the 103rd Aero Pursuit Squadron, and though the number of the unit had changed, the “Screaming Sioux Warrior” was still used as the unit insignia.  Historical responsibility of the Lafayette Escadrille transferred to the 103rd as well; it was responsible for the unit’s history. 

The 103rd did include the Lafayette Escadrille history as part of its own, but understandably the unit was more interested with its own exploits and contributions to the war effort and this is readily apparent in a review of the 103rd squadron history. 4 Fortunately for those interested, the Journale des marches et operations, Escadrille 124, Volumes One and Two, exist to this day in good condition at the National Air and Space Museum, and are available for private viewing.  These were kept and updated by squadron members and certified by Thenault, and although the log starts in late August 1916, it is complete through February 1918.  Besides this, no official history was kept during the war.  The Journale reads like a daily flight log, so it does not cover in detail all of the squadron’s activities.  Understandably, the unit was in combat operations and it is fortunate that Thenault decided to keep any log at all. 5

After the war, the 103rd was consolidated with the 94th Aero Pursuit Squadron in 1924.  The 94th is still an active duty USAF unit flying in the USAF’s 1st Fighter Wing based at Langley, Virginia. Technically, the lineage of the Escadrille had passed on to the 94th Aero Pursuit Squadron. 6

Per war department Circular 25, dated April 8, 1924, “the 103rd Aero Squadron was reconstituted and consolidated into, and as part of the 94th Aero Pursuit Squadron.” 7 According to the Air Force Historical Research Agency (AFHRA) at Maxwell Air Force Base, in a letter to Lieutenant Colonel Bruce Freeman, the “history and honors of the 103rd Aero Pursuit Squadron, and thus the Lafayette Escadrille, are perpetuated by the 94th Tactical Fighter Squadron (TFS). 8

Yet according to researchers familiar with the subject, this had not been done.  The 94th TFS has not integrated its history with the 103rd.  First of all, the “Hat in the Ring” symbol used by the 94th was originally a personal insignia used by James Norman Hall of the Lafayette Escadrille, a full year before the 94th APS would adopt this insignia.  Then, on the subject of victories, an official unit history was released in 1976 at Langley Air Force Base, Virginia, claiming that ‘the 94th “Hat in the Ring” Squadron scored the first air superiority victory in the history of the USAF.” 9 But the 103rd already had seven confirmed “all –American” kills as well as twelve “probables” between February 18, 1918, and two months later when the 94th claimed its first kill.  The 40 American kills achieved by the N-124 are not mentioned either. 10

Talks and efforts to reestablish the 103rd in honor of the Lafayette Escadrille have met with no success.  The USAF has offered an official explanation in a document entitled “Explanation as to why the 103rd cannot be Resuscitated.” Namely, that it is nearly impossible to bring back a unit once it has been decommissioned; indeed there are no precedents to do so.  Also, the 103rd designation falls into a numbering system dedicated to the Air Mobility Command and the National Guard system; there is a unit that currently carries the 103-designation.  In brief, the USAF has no interest in resurrecting the 103rd. 11

But where did the Lafayette Escadrille fit into the USAS’s picture of World War I history as a whole? In The U. S. Air Service in World War I, which was completed by USAS historians and produced in four volumes, the Lafayette Escadrille is only mentioned on four occasions in a series that span 2,319 pages.  The few references are at least favorable, to include the following,

“When the Lafayette escadrille was called to help as in 94th and 95th Aero Pursuit Squadrons it worked very well.  The work was greatly appreciated, and the Lafayette Escadrille, who had experienced men, were assigned to new squadrons.  The presence of the pilots at the front, accounted greatly in taking the other pilots across the big transition from school flying to fighting.” 12 

The other references mention the Lafayette Escadrille in passing, and there is only one paragraph of eight lines dedicated to the Lafayette Escadrille’s transition to the 103rd. 13 Nothing is noted of the Lafayette Escadrille’s wartime accomplishments.  The lack of references to the unit is astounding, considering that the unit had been in continuous combat for close to 23 months – the USAS’s next longest squadron in continuous combat in World War I was the 103rd, which fought for nine months. 

Gorrell’s History of the American Expeditionary Forces Air Service, 1917-1919, which is maintained by the U. S. National Archives, has a slightly more extensive coverage of the Lafayette Escadrille.  The short unit history it uses was written by Major Dr. Edmund Gros USAS, who although writing a balanced, apt history, neglects to go into details and tells the story more from an administrator’s point of view (which he was) than from a pilot’s point of view. Gorrell’s history does not contain an official unit record of accomplishments, nor does it go into great detail.  Furthermore, only 27 pages are dedicated to the Lafayette Escadrille in a series that contains 282 bound volumes of tens of thousands of pages. 14

No Home for the Lafayette Men in the United States 

There are no exclusive monuments in the United States dedicated to the Lafayette Escadrille or the Lafayette Flying Corps.  There are several statues, monuments, and plaques dedicated to individual members of the Escadrille or the Corps, but all of them except for one exception, were locally funded and supported.  None of these are dedicated as a direct result of the U. S. Government or the USAF.

The existing monuments erected in the memory of the individuals of the Lafayette Escadrille are few and scattered.  Kiffin Yates Rockwell has a few monuments and plaques erected in his memory.  At Lee’s Chapel in Lexington, Virginia, there is a plaque dedicated to Kiffin on the wall.  There also exists a North Carolina State Historical Marker at the corner of Merrimen Avenue and Hillside Street in Ashburn, North Carolina, honoring Kiffin and his home. 15

Of course, Kiffin’s rival in the Escadrille, Norman Prince, is buried and memorialized at the National Cathedral in Washington, D. C.  James Rogers McConnell and Andrew Courtney Campbell are honored well at the University of Virginia, in Charlottesville, Virginia.  McConnell has a street named after him, has a statue in the form of Icarus erected to him on the grounds, and has a plaque in his honor in the school chapel.  Campbell also has a plaque dedicated to him and a building in his honor. 16 There is also an obelisk erected in McConnell’s memoriam in his hometown of Carthage, North Carolina. 17 The rest of the small plaques and monuments erected to individual members remain similarly dispersed and obscure. 

A plaque exists at the USAF Academy Football Stadium in Colorado Springs, Colorado, dedicated to the pilots who died for France in 1914-1918, but no men are mentioned individually.  To this author’s knowledge there are no other officially U. S. Government sponsored monuments or plaques. 18

These scattered monuments do not honor the unit and they do nothing to promote the unit’s history.  To illustrate the point, the author stood outside of the University of Virginia Alderman Library, where the Icarus-shaped statue to James Rogers McConnell, stands prominently, and surveyed 100 students on the identity of the monument and whom it was erected to.  Out of the 100 surveyed, only 25 students knew whom the statue represented, and the majority of this 25 were graduate students who either worked at the library or did research regularly at the library.  Only two undergraduate students knew that it was dedicated to James Rogers McConnell.  Only a fraction of the 25 knew what the Lafayette Escadrille was (five).  To make sure that this was not just an isolated incident, the author went back through University of Virginia student campus publications and discovered that in the past decades, there were movements aboard campus to have the statue completely removed from grounds due to its reputed ugliness.  It took editorials and research from other students to remind the statue-haters that it represented one of their famous own, and that it was a memorial to a fallen war hero.  The students who wanted the statue removed had not known that, and they subsequently backed down. 19

There exists no monument dedicated to the Escadrille’s great ace – Lufbery.  There is no marker for his birthplace.  No flying fields are named after him, no statues are erected to him.  The only thing that keeps his name and record alive are the history books that speak of him. 20 

No museum in the Unites States has a dedicated exhibit in honor to the Lafayette Escadrille or Corps, private or public, and this includes the National Air and Space Museum.  Although there are many exhibits dedicated to early flight in America and to World War I, the American combat aviators of the Lafayette remain conspicuously absent, or are mentioned merely in passing. With no central location dedicated to their homage, with no central repository of information and knowledge of the Lafayette Escadrille and the Flying Corps, it is no surprise that the men have slipped into obscurity. 

The USAF has not done a satisfactory job of documenting the Lafayette Escadrille and Lafayette Flying Corps contributions either.  The AFHRA contains over 80 million pages in its central archives, yet the lack of primary source material and general material on the Lafayette Escadrille is surprising.  21 The USAF Museum in Dayton, Ohio, which bills itself as the “World’s Largest and Oldest Aviation Museum,” has only one museum display case dedicated to the Lafayette aviators.  Furthermore, in the Museum’s official Internet website, several of the Lafayette Escadrille’s men’s names are spelled incorrectly and there are errors in the unit history.  22                   

The USAF’s History and Museum Program’s Fiftieth Anniversary Commemorative Edition, A Concise History of the U. S. Air Force, has only two sentences dedicated to the Lafayette Escadrille.  In these two lines, the book erroneously states that Norman Prince was the founder, had five official victories, and that he transferred to the USAS, when, in fact, he was killed in combat before the USAS ever entered France.  The Concise History also lists April 14, 1918, as the first official American victory, claimed by the 94th, which denies the Lafayette Escadrille’s and 103rd’s claims. 23       

In France, the Memory Lives on 

If there is one body of people that has not forgotten the Lafayette Escadrille, it is the French.  The one-armed French General Henri Gourand captured the French sentiment in this phrase, 

“When men who have no obligation to fight, who could not possibly be criticized if they did not fight – yet nevertheless decide upon their own individual initiative to risk their lives in defense of a cause they hold dear – then we are in the presence of true heroes.” 24 

In fact, the Lafayette Escadrille still exists.  In 1920, the French designated the 7th squadron of the 35th Aviation Regiment as the re-born Lafayette Escadrille in memory of the men who came to help France in her hour of need.  The purpose was to perpetuate the name and serve as a reminder of the “best example of Franco-American friendship since the American Revolution.” 25 The unit was re-designated as the 2/5 Groupe de Chasse and served in Casablanca during Word War II, and became the most famous escadrille in the war. 26

The unit instilled some new traditions, but it always kept the insignia of the Lafayette Escadrille, the Sioux Warrior.  A review though the squadron history demonstrated in pamphlets and documents shows that the French pilots have done their best to keep alive an American “cowboy” spirit by instituting rites and passages involving Sioux and Indian dress. 27

The unit holds reunions every year to commemorate the Lafayette traditions and all former members are invited to attend.  The surviving members, while they were alive, were often invited, Charles Dolan was the last survivor to attend. 28

The memory of the dead is not forgotten either.  There is a plaque to Kiffin Yates Rockwell which marks where he fell in the French countryside. 29 In the town of Luxeuil there is also a special plaque next to his grave in the town cemetery.  In Luxeuil’s town square, there is a plaque dedicated to all of the men of the Lafayette Escadrille, thanking them for their contribution to France.   And there is a plaque on one of the sides of the hotels, denoting where the men used to stay. 30 And there is a plaque and unit memorabilia at the Luxeuil air base where the current Lafayette Escadrille was based. 31

There is a monument erected in memory of James Rogers McConnell in Fleury-le-martel where he fell, which was dedicated on June 24, 2000. 32 Ronald Hoskier has a square named after him in D’Etalon. 33 Many of the men are honored in the Pantheon, a celebrated hall of fame of France’s immortal heroes.  Here the visitor can see the name of the men who fell for France and who were awarded the Legion of Honor: Charles J. Biddle, Victor Campbell, Raoul Lufbery, Norman Prince, David Putnam, Kiffin Rockwell, Robert Soubiran, and William Thaw are some of the men listed in this special sanctuary. 34

France was also quick to recognize the Lafayette aviators’ efforts during the war.  Marshall Petain gave the Lafayette Escadrille two unit citations, the first on August 17, 1917, and the second on October 22, 1918. 35 The unit was also awarded the fourragere of the Croix de Guerre, which was only awarded to 26 units during the war. 36 A special brevet was authorized and given to the Lafayette Flying Corps pilots by the Minister of War in 1918. 37 Marshall Foch awarded the aviators another citation November 7, 1919. 38 

The American Government has never officially recognized the Lafayette Escadrille or the Lafayette Flying Corps with a special citation or award.

* * *

That France remembers the Lafayette aviators better than the Americans speaks volumes about the Lafayette’s state of affairs in America.   One could perhaps say that the French have more reason to thank the American aviators.  But the truth is that America has failed to commemorate the Lafayette men.  

  

  1. Lettre, date 19 septembre 1970, Charles Dolan à M. Q. Beam.  Charles Dolan Collection.
  2. Freeman, Bruce M., The Lafayette Escadrille: Preserving her Heritage (University of Nebraska, 2000), p. 2.
  3. Gorrell, Edgar S., Gorrell’s History of the AEF Air Service (USAF Information Circular, 1921), p. 2. 
  4. 103rd Aero Pursuit Squadron Logbook.
  5. Journal: Escadrille N° 124.
  6. Freeman, The Lafayette Escadrille.
  7. Ibid.
  8. Ibid.
  9. Ibid.
  10. Ibid.
  11. Ibid.
  12. The USAS in World War I, Vol. I, p. 285.
  13. Ibid., p. 288.
  14. Gorrell’s History.
  15. Rockwell, Interview: Paul Rockwell, p. 27.
  16. Visite d’auteur.
  17. Archives du NASM, Smithsonian Institution.
  18. Lettre, date juin 1963, de Austen Crehore.  Austen Crehore Collection.
  19. The Cavalier Daily, date 2 novemmbre 1995, et The University Journal, date 10 novembre 1982.
  20. Flammer, The Vivid Air, p. 187.
  21. Air Force History and Museums Programs Brochure, 2001.
  22. Visite d’auteur.
  23. McFarland, Stephen L., A Concise History of the U. S. Air Force (Air Force History and Museums Program, 1997), p. 7.
  24. Mason, Lafayette Escadrille, p. 105.
  25. Flammer, Vivid Air, p. 198.
  26. Entrevue avec M. Jean Gisclon.
  27. Publication de l’Escadrille Lafayette 2/5.
  28. Entrevue avec M. Gisclon.
  29. Flying for France vidéo.
  30. Visite d’auteur.
  31. Ibid.
  32. James R. McConnell Collection.
  33. Gordon, The Lafayette Flying Corps, P. 138.
  34. La Cohorte, N° 99 et visite du Pantheon par l’auteur.
  35. Parsons, I Flew, p. 296.
  36. Ibid., p. 314.
  37. Gros, A Brief History, p. 17.
  38. Battle Creek Airshow brochure, Charles Dolan Collection.
Publié dans Uncategorized | Commentaires fermés sur Chapter Eight. America’s Failure to Commemorate the Lafayette Aviators

Chapter Seven. The Legacy of the Lafayette Aviators

The Lafayette Escadrille Memorial dedication ceremony on July 4, 1928, drew 10,000 spectators; an additional 10,000 visitors came the following month. 1 By July 1929, the Memorial was averaging over 3,600 a month. 2 As a matter of record, the Lafayette Escadrille official tally of visitors for its first year of existence was as follows:

1928

September: 6,112

October: 3,252

November: 2,280

December: 2,013

1929

January: 1,207

February: 817

March: 3,757

April: 4,320

May: 5,328

June: 5,383

July: 5,242

Total: 39,711 3  

These numbers are very respectable and represent a steady flow of visitors the first twelve months of the Memorial’s existence.  However, in the later years the number of visitors had dropped precipitously.  Other than the occasional Memorial Day ceremony or other official occasion, the Memorial is neglected.  “One bugler and three other people,” were the head counts, said one of the Foundation Members of the Lafayette Escadrille. 4 The Lafayette Memorial Foundation reported that the number of visitors have dropped to less than three hundred a year, to include all ceremonies and tattoos.  The analogy of the forgotten Memorial once again comes to mind. 

* * *

Of the Lafayette Escadrille, Paul Rockwell once wrote,

“No novel of war or of exotic adventure can compare in interest with the plain, true story of the little group of American citizens who volunteered to fight for France in the early days of the World War.  Fiction writers have imagined nothing more thrilling and more splendidly heroic than the deeds of some of these men, nor can picture anything greater or more stirring than moments that came to them; words cannot describe fatigue and hardships, and suffering more bitter than they at times knew.” 5 

The story of the Lafayette Aviators is an amazing one, but has their glory faded? As one historian lamented, “Their fame slowly vanished and one of the greatest American stories of dedication to liberty and moral courage has been buried in obscurity.” 6

It is evident that the Lafayette men experienced a measure of fame and recognition immediately after the war, as evidenced by the number of visitors to the Memorial in 1928.  But what led to their fame vanishing and their story becoming obscure? It turns out the Lafayette aviators were in a large part responsible for not protecting their own legacy.    

After the War

The disillusionment and despair that post World War I Europe and the world would suffer created a backlash of all things associated with war; this permeated societies and cultures between the two great wars.  People wanted to forget the horror of the trenches and the millions lost.    

There were no mechanisms in place to support the retuning soldiers as exist today.  The notion of “post-traumatic syndrome” did not exist, and soldiers were just expected to pick up from where they had left off.  There were no support groups, no veteran’s administrations, no way for these men to come back and live normal lives in the community.  For men who had fought and flown for four long years, the return to a normal life was something difficult to grasp.  For the men of the Lafayette Escadrille, there was nothing to return to in America.  “How could one patrol day after day over the hellish inferno of Verdun or the Somme and then return untouched by that experience? It would permeate, taint, and penetrate one’s life and dreams to the end,” a survivor of the Escadrille once said. 7 Many aviators correctly believed the air industry would bloom, and that perhaps their future lay in aviation.  But there were thousands of pilots, and the jobs did not exist.  “Stay there! Don’t come back! There’s nothing here, at least you have a job!” was one pilot’s advice to his comrades still stationed in post war France. 8 However, the men could not stay in the service; like all countries, the great U. S. mobilization was over, and the great armies would be stood down.

If the legacy of the squadron of the Lafayette Escadrille was to live up to the image that the survivors wanted, it was going to be largely up to them to foster and preserve it.  However, the survivors of the Lafayette Escadrille, many mired in a post-war funk, failed in this endeavor, mostly through a lack of effort and coordination.  Also, when the unit had been disbanded and its members shuffled to other units, only a few went on to the 103rd Aero Pursuit Squadron.  The lack of cohesion of Escadrille members, stemming from the breakup of the squadron in February 1918, proved costly to the Lafayette Escadrille.  The broken contacts between men continued long after the war.  The men briefly united in 1928 for the Memorial dedication, but this reunification did not provide the impetus needed, mostly due to the acrimony and hard feelings involved with Lafayette Escadrille and Layette Flying Corps differences.  It was not until many years later that the survivors of the Lafayette Escadrille reunited, their number less than ten.  But the effort was too little and too late, led by men that were not long for this earth.

“The Ringers”  

Lacking cohesion and spirit between the wars, members did little to bolster their reputation or history.  Except for L’Association du Memorial de l’Escadrille Lafayette founded in 1923, and the subsequent Lafayette Memorial Foundation founded in 1930, no associations, organizations, or groups existed to protect or unite the Lafayette Escadrille men after the war. 

Despite the lack of cohesion, the members of the Lafayette Escadrille and the Lafayette Flying Corps looked on in derision, bewilderment, and disgust as a growing list of “ringers,” or poseurs, claimed membership in the Lafayette Escadrille.  This list of men pretending as if they had served with the Lafayette Escadrille grew to number of 4,000 people — a one hundred-fold increase over the original Escadrille membership numbers. 9

Some of the problem stemmed from the confusion of the differences between the Lafayette Escadrille and the Lafayette Flying Corps.  Some equated anyone as having served in the flying war as being a member.  Some of this confusion was understandable since the men of the Lafayette Escadrille and Flying Corps themselves were not exactly sure who fit in their ranks, as witnessed by the problems of the honor roll for the Memorial.  What was not excusable was the longer list of congressmen, artists, authors, hobos, con artists, flim-flam men, and those from all walks of life who had no business claiming to be members of the great Escadrille.  Even the renown author William Faulkner at times claimed membership in the unit, saying that he had flown for the famous unit, when in reality he had joined the Canadian Air Force and never left Canada. 10      

Some of the ringers were harmless; others caused great harm.  One man claimed to be none other than Andrew Courtney Campbell, back from the dead.  The real Campbell had been shot down and died behind enemy lines, so his body was never recovered.  This ringer used this bit of knowledge to successfully run a scam; he claimed that he was shot down and taken prisoner by the Germans; however, due to his injuries he had suffered amnesia.  He was released by the Germans and wandered around Europe before finally realizing who he really was.  He used this scam for financial gain, and was even to be married to a woman of good family when his whole scheme came undone.  Members of the Lafayette Escadrille, led by Paul Rockwell, hunted this fraud down and exposed him.  Part of the testimony used against him was by the very German who had shot down Campbell during the war.  The German officer followed Campbell’s plane down and verified who the pilot was he had killed, a not uncommon practice. 11

Another man under indictment for a variety of crimes, claimed, as a defense in a court of law, that he was a member of the famed Lafayette Escadrille.  He stated that his war record was impeccable, that he had been wounded, and that he was the infamous pilot who had flown through the Arc de Triomphe in 1919.  The court, without verifying the claims, believed him and took it on good faith that no one would lie about such a thing.  The man was acquitted of 28 of the 29 counts leveled against him. He was not exposed until late after his trial. 12

Paul Rockwell, Charles Dolan, Harold Willis, and Edwin Parsons did their best through the years to expose the charlatans as they came out, but it was a frustrating and difficult endeavor.  The biggest problem was that their actions were reactive, and by the time the fraud had been exposed, usually the damage to the name of the Lafayette Escadrille had already been done.  Undoubtedly, the proliferation of ringers and poseurs caused the name of the Lafayette Escadrille to be cheapened while damaging the reputation of the Lafayette heroes overall.   

The Lafayette Escadrille Ne’er-do-wells  

The Lafayette Escadrille did not need ringers to sully its name when several of its own members were causing problems.  Rockwell and others spent much time defending the unit’s reputation from actual members of the Lafayette Escadrille and the Lafayette Flying Corps. 

Bert Hall was heard from again, much as he predicted.  Since he left the unit he had pursued an interesting career punctuated by crime, fraud, and jail time.  He wrote a piece called The Issues that was published by a magazine; in it he described the Lafayette Escadrille members as swindlers, embezzlers, and miscreants.  The sordid piece painted the men of the unit as a bunch of misfits, and it caused uproar amongst the former Escadrille members; but it was too late, more damage was done.  Paul Rockwell was still visibly upset about it forty years later in an Oral History Program interview sponsored by the USAF.  He was still enraged and said that Hall had done irreparable damage to the unit’s reputation.  Ironically, perhaps predictably, Hall was caught in a swindling and embezzlement scheme of his own.  He traveled to China on numerous occasions, and under the guise of using his influence back in the United States to start an arms shipment scheme to a Chinese warlord, he managed to have the gullible warlord give him several hundred thousand dollars.  When the due shipment did not arrive, the Chinese Warlord raised enough flack to have Hall arrested and prosecuted.  He served two and half years of prison time.  He truly represented the worst of the Lafayette Escadrille. 13 

Other Lafayette Flying Corpsmen had brushes with the law as well, giving the unit more notoriety.  One man named Edgar Bouligny shot and killed his wife.  Another man named William Frey was a deserter from the French, and was forced to live his life on the lam.  A few committed suicide.  Some were committed to mental institutions.  Others would be marked as alcoholic ne’er-do-wells — broke, drunk and failures. 14

Lafayette Escadrille-inspired Adventures Between the Wars   

The Lafayette aviator legacy had some positive impact because there were attempts to establish Lafayette Escadrille-like volunteer squadrons between the world wars.  In each of these instances, the Lafayette Escadrille was specifically mentioned as an inspiration.  Some of them became famous; others were even less well known than the Escadrille.  

In 1919, Poland, a newly created country, had to fight for its independence against invading Russian Bolsheviks.  An American Pole from Chicago named Merian C. Cooper requested and received approval from the Polish Government to form what was called the “Kosciuszko Squadron.” Named in honor of the Polish officer who had fought for the Americans during the Revolutionary War, it was a 17-plane unit that flew for Poland, consisting entirely of Americans. 15 

Long before America entered the war with Germany in World War II, American volunteers were flying with the Royal Air Force (RAF).  They were called the RAF Eagles, and they were inspired largely by the Lafayette Escadrille.  In China, the Flying Tigers were formed by General Chennault, and received tacit approval and support by the American Government to fight the Japanese in defense of the Burma Road.  The Lafayette Escadrille was also cited as a role model;  its fame would eventually eclipse the Lafayette Escadrille’s. 16   

Two simultaneous, independent efforts to reform the actual Lafayette Escadrille were raised at the beginning of World War II in 1939, to reform the actual Lafayette Escadrille.  One effort was led by a soldier of fortune named Charles Sweeny and former Lafayette pilot Edwin Parsons; Paul Rockwell and Harold B. Willis led the other effort.  Both operated and planned in much secrecy; however, both were terminated for different reasons.  Parsons’ adventure actually had men signed up and on their way to training in France when the FBI stopped and arrested them, disbanding the fledging unit.  No charges were filed.  Paul Rockwell and Willis had made it to Paris and were in the planning and recruitment phase when the Germans overran Paris, effectively ending their plans. 17 Had these last two Lafayette Escadrille experiments succeeded, they would have perhaps proved a boon to the original Lafayette Escadrille members, and their legacy would have resurfaced.  

Hollywood

In 1958, a former Lafayette Flying Corps man named William W. Wellman made a movie about the Lafayette Escadrille.  Unfortunately, the chance to resurrect the epic tale of true heroism and valor of the Lafayette Escadrille was ruined by Wellman’s creation, a terrible, reckless, unfaithful movie.  Hopes that the movie would bring the Lafayette Escadrille a much-needed boost in fame evaporated when leaks before the release proclaimed it a dud.  

Wellman, had flown with SPA -87 from December 1917 to March 1918.  It was hoped that with Wellman at the helm, Hollywood would make a great war-movie that could honor the Escadrille; he promised as much to Paul Rockwell.  Wellman had already directed a movie in 1926, an aviation classic called Wings, for which he had won an Oscar.  As the movie was being made, the Hollywood press touted him as one of the original Lafayette Escadrille members, a claim he did not refute, which raised the suspicion and ire of the true members.18

When word leaked out from a starlet that Wellman was making a “dirty” movie, the men of the Lafayette prepared to fight back.  Wellman had promised them that the movie would be a true story, but it could not have been further from the truth.  The movie was an abomination.  The title character was a spoiled, rich kid from Boston, who had gotten in serious trouble with the law, and so had fled to France.  He joined the Lafayette Escadrille, struck an officer, deserted the unit, killed a “poilu” for his uniform to help his escape, went to Paris and became a pimp, and  on and on.  The aviation scenes were well received, but that was about all that was worthwhile in the movie.  The men of the Lafayette Escadrille were stunned and ashamed that people would think they were associated with such a bad crowd. 19

The movie premiered in Washington, North Carolina, on February 28, 1958; the home town of James H. Baugham, one of the Lafayette Flying Corps.  The Governor of North Carolina declared the day as “Lafayette Escadrille Day.” The producers invited all of the living Escadrille men, but all declined except one.  Charles Dolan made an official response on behalf of the unit: “The remaining survivors of the Lafayette Escadrille N-124 are opposed to the exploitation of this unit by Mr. Wellman and associates, solely for their financial benefit.” At least the movie was banned from playing in France at the time.  It was not a commercial success, and even Mr. Wellman ended up distancing himself from the production.

Unfortunately, the damage was done.  The Lafayette name was dragged through the mud.  This film is still shown today on television and it is available on video; the interest in the movie is largely due to it being one of Clint Eastwood’s earliest performances as a bit character.  People who know nothing of the unit will watch this movie and fall to the false notion that the Escadrille men were a bunch of mercenaries and misfits. 20

Societies, Associations, and Orders of the Lafayette  

On February 1, 1928, a booklet was published that listed the addresses and names of the surviving members of the Lafayette Escadrille and Flying Corps at the time.  This book was put together for the express intent of presenting it to the men at the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial dedication.  This effort was one of the only attempts ever made between the wars by members of the Lafayette Escadrille or Lafayette Flying Corps to establish some sort of a “survivor’s group.”  Besides the Lafayette Escadrille Foundation, who had made the lists for the booklet, no societies, associations, groups, companies, brotherhoods, or orders dedicated to the perseverance of the Lafayette Escadrille history existed. 21

It is not until 1939, that the men of the Lafayette finally established the “Lafayette Escadrille Corporation” in order to protect the good name of the unit.  This was forced upon them when they found out that a bar at the 1939 World’s Fair in New York, was going to exploit their name to sell beer.  The Corporation effectively gave the Escadrille men the rights to the name.  After this effort, the men disappeared into the shadows. 22  

The first official reunion of just the Lafayette Escadrille members would not take place until June 3, 1960, in Ashburn, North Carolina, at Paul Rockwell’s home.  Sadly, there were only eight surviving members at the time of this official reunion.  Six men traveled to attend it, one could not due to his health, and one, labeled as Mr. ‘X’ in some history texts to protect his privacy, would not come to the reunion due to his shame. (The author believes that Mr. “X” is the infamous Rumsey who had the dubious distinction of having set fire to his own plane). 23 [Another member still alive at the time but unknown to the men of the reunion was Eugene Bullard in Chicago.]

At the reunion, the remaining men created the Lafayette Escadrille N-124 Society.  According to a pamphlet made for the society, the “following principles shall form the basis of the Lafayette Escadrille N-124 Society:”

n      An incessant attention to preserve inviolate the good name and fame of the Escadrille, with prompt and public protest when an attempt is made to exploit that name for personal or commercial gain.

n      To watch over the crypt and its well-being.

n      And to pass on the legacy to the eldest family male once death takes a survivor. 24 

The idea, although splendid, was too late.  By 1967, there would only be three members at the last reunion, and at this stage in their lives, they were too few and too old to stem the tide of history.  The Lafayette Escadrille N-124 Society’s promise to pass the legacy of the unit onto the eldest male was not followed and the society would cease to exist when the last remaining survivor passed away.  

Nevertheless, after the initial reunion in 1960, a flurry of Lafayette Escadrille and Flying Corps societies and organizations appeared; as if close to death the men suddenly realized the threat to their legacy.  After the Lafayette Escadrille N-124 Society was established, the men passed out official certificates to all remaining members.  An “Order of the Lafayette, Incorporated,” was established soon after. The purpose of the Order was to serve as a non-profit, hereditary organization much like that of the “Society of the Cincinnati,” an American military society dedicated to honoring her veterans.  On one formal Order of the Lafayette occasion, held at the Waldorf-Astoria in New York City, over 2,000 guests, many of which were rich and famous people, to include former Presidents of the United States, honored the men of the Lafayette. 25 Later in their lives, there was talk of forming a “Lafayette Escadrille Historical Association” (in a letter to Charles Dolan on April 17, 1970), but it was apparently never instituted. 26 And as late as 1979, Charles Dolan speaks of an “L’Escadrille Lafayette and Lafayette Flying Corps Association” that existed, although its mandate and mission are unclear. 27

Charles Dolan, the last survivor of the Lafayette Escadrille died in 1981.  With him passed the torch of the Escadrille.  He was one of the major protagonists behind whatever successful legacy the Lafayette enjoyed, and he had a great part to play in the above listed associations, societies, and orders.  To read his correspondence collection is to see that he was one of the true believers in keeping alive the history of the unit.  True to the end, he would show his spunk and determination by visiting the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial one more time on November 10, 1981, the American Veteran’s Day celebration and the French Victory Day celebration; the French were also celebrating the 65th Anniversary of the Lafayette Escadrille.  Dolan, though feeble and sick, made the trip.  He died in December 1981.  It was fitting that he would see the Memorial as the last survivor, having been the Escadrille’s biggest proponent in its later years. 

The Legacy of the Original Thirty-Eight

The legacy of the original 38 Americans of the Lafayette Escadrille was one of overall woe.  History had not been kind to these men who were once blessed with youth, who once basked in the glow of fame, who once led the way for American combat aviators.  In a brief synopsis, this is what happened to them all, listed in order of their enlistment in the unit.

Chapman, Victor: Killed in action, June 23, 1916.

McConnell, James Rogers: Killed in action, March 19, 1917.

Prince, Norman: Killed in action, October 15, 1916.

Rockwell, Kiffin Yates: Killed in action, September 23, 1916.

Thaw, William: Died at 40 years of age from pneumonia; April 22, 1934; alcoholic.

Cowdin, Elliot: Itinerant, jack-of-all-trades, never settled down; died from cancer in January 1933.

Hall, Bert Weston: Rogue, ne’er-do-well.  Died December 1948, massive heart attack led to car crash.

Lufbery, Raoul: Killed in action, May 1, 1918.

Balsley, Clyde: Severely wounded in combat, never fully recovered from wounds, died               

early at 48 years old, heart gave out, July 1942.

Johnson, Chouteau: Died of throat cancer in 1939.

Rumsey, Lawrence: Mister “X”, alcoholic, died 80 years old in May 1967, never worked, became a recluse.

Hill, Dudley: Died at 57 years of age from heart attack; normal, quiet life.

Masson, Didier: Hotel manager, died at age 64, June 1950.

Pavelka, Paul: Killed by horse falling on him in Balkans on November 12, 1917.

Rockwell, Rob: Successful life in military aviation, promoted to colonel.  Died in January 1958 from heart attack 

Haviland, Willis:  Promoted to commander in the Navy, but died early at 54 years old of cancer in November 1944.

Prince, Frederick: Overlooked by his father, died in October 1962, self-made man.

Soubiran, Robert: Died at age 62 in February 1949, jack-of-all-trades, never really settled down.

Hoskier, Ronald: Killed in action, April 23, 1917.

Genet, Edmond: Killed in action, April 16, 1917.  

Parsons, Edwin: Died 75 years old in May 1968; became an admiral in the Navy.

Bigelow, Stephen: Died at age 44, in 1939, from alcoholism and tuberculosis.

Lovell, Walter: Died at age 53 in September 1937, from brain abscess.

Hinkle, Edward: Died at age 90 in January 1967; good life.

Willis, Harold: Died at age 73 of cancer in 1962; good life.

Marr, Kenneth: Died at age 78 in December 1963; good life.

Dugan, William: Died early of illness at age 34 in September 1922.

Hewitt, Thomas: Died early of alcoholism at 41 years of age in May 1936.

Campbell, Andrew: Killed in action, October 1, 1917.

Bridgman, Ray: Died at age 56, committed suicide in November 1951.

Dolan, Charles: Last survivor, colonel in the USAF, good life, died 1981.

Drexel, John: Died at age 66 in March 1958, from heart attack; rich family, good life. 

Jones, Henry: Died at age 79 in March 1972; good life.

Hall, James Norman: Died at age 64; famous author, died from heart attack in July 1951.

MacMonagle, Douglas: Killed in action, September 24, 1917.

Peterson, David: Killed in training accident after war at age 24 in March 1919.

Doolittle, James: Killed in training accident during the war at age 24 in July 1918.

Ford, Christopher: Died of cancer at age 52, in April 1945. 28 

Of the original 38, nine were killed in action; two more would eventually die from their wounds.  One died from a horse fall.  Two died in training accidents.  Ten died early in their lives from alcoholism and/or disease and other ailments.  One committed suicide.  A few lived their lives as do-nothings, ne’er-do-wells, and rogues; a few could never find a good job, had trouble adjusting after the war, and were shells of their former selves. Only one quarter had what could be called a full, rewarding, post war life.  Of this one quarter, none would become senators, congressmen, presidents, or very famous men, although a few had brushes with greatness.  For most of these men, the Lafayette Escadrille would be the highlight of their lives.  The lack of a strong, healthy legacy, which was not bolstered by any famous men, did not help America remember their once famous aviators.     

Too little, Too Late

There was a time when the Lafayette Escadrille was America’s favorite son.  However, post war detractors caused the men’s reputation and history to slip.  Their efforts were always applauded, but they also gained an unsavory reputation of being men with “unbalanced temperaments,” and as being adventurers, mercenaries, and even “American privateers.” 29 Undoubtedly, “the ringers,” the untoward actions of some of the men, and botched enterprises like the Lafayette Escadrille movie caused them untold damage.

 

  1. Lettre, date 4 septembre 1928, Lewis Crenshaw à M. Bigelow.  Blérancourt.
  2. Lettre, date 1 août 1929, Lewis Crenshaw à M. Bartlett.  Blérancourt.
  3. Archives de la Fondation du Mémorial de l’Escadrille Lafayette, dossier des chiffres de visiteurs, Blérancourt.
  4. Citation du membre de la Fondation du Mémorial.
  5. Whitehouse, Lafayette Escadrille, p. 315.
  6.  Flammer, Philip M., « The Summer of the Lafayette Escadrille.” Air Power Historian, 1967, p. 78.
  7. Gordon, Pilot Biographies.
  8. Whitehouse, Lafayette Escadrille, p. 312.
  9.  Flammer, Vivid Air, p. 187-190.
  10.  Ibid.
  11.  Ibid.
  12.  Ibid.
  13.  Sources divers.
  14.  Gordon, Lafayette Flying Corps.  
  15.  Seagrave, Sterling, Soldiers of Fortune (Virginia, Time-Life Books, 1981), p. 35.
  16.  Ford, Flying Tigers, et Caine, Philip D. Eagles of the RAF (Washington, D.C., NDU Press, 1991).
  17.  Flammer, Vivid Air, p. 192.
  18.  Ibid., p. 194.
  19.  Ibid., p. 195.
  20.  Ibid., p. 196 et l’auteur qui a regardé la vidéo.
  21.  Brochure pour l’inauguration du Mémorial de l’Escadrille Lafayette, 1 février 1928, NASMA.
  22. Flammer, Vivid Air, p. 189 et Charles Dolan Collection.
  23. Flammer, « The Summer of the Lafayette Escadrille.” Air Power Historian, 1967, p. 81.
  24. Lafayette Escadrille N-124 Society Charter.  Charles Dolan Collection.  USAF Academy.
  25. Lettre, date inconnu, Austen Crehore à Charles Dolan.  Charles Dolan Collection.
  26. Invitation à cérémonie, date 21 septembre 1966.  Charles Dolan Collection.
  27. Charles Dolan Collection.
  28. Ibid.
  29. Sources divers.
  1. Robins, American Angels, p. 40.
Publié dans Uncategorized | Commentaires fermés sur Chapter Seven. The Legacy of the Lafayette Aviators

Chapter Six. Dissension in the Ranks

Every unit has its personalities, quirks, competition, politics, and issues; the Lafayette Escadrille would be no different.  The original band of thirty-eight volunteers came from all walks of life: they were college students, the scions of famous American families, jacks of all trades, former military men, and taxi drivers.  The mix of personalities added to the unit’s glamour and all-American spirit, and it endeared the men to the adoring public even more.  But as the pressures and stress of combat fatigued the men, the mix of forceful personalities started to create divisive problems.  Rivalries developed, some of which became open and nasty.  Some of the men were accused of being shirkers and cowardly.  A general lack of unit discipline on the ground and in the air would cause problems with the law and, in some cases, cost pilots their lives.  Drinking became an issue for some of the men and would ruin their lives.  As competition increased for glory and acclaim, men questioned each other’s intentions and alleged hidden agendas.  Many of the men got along with each other or kept to themselves; but the ones who clashed caused schisms and internecine squabbling that would taint the Lafayette Escadrille’s legacy.

* * *

The mark of great units is their teamwork and selflessness.  The Lafayette Escadrille suffered from a rash of discipline problems and, more importantly, from dissension that would cause the unit great pain and unravel its cohesion.  Some of these problems would fester and spill over into the squadron’s post-war lives – some transgressions and rivalries were never put to rest, and were eventually taken to the grave.  Even though the unit would survive this turmoil, this dissension and discord could not help but taint the squadron’s legacy.

Lack of Discipline in the Ranks 

Captain Thenault described his charges’ cocky attitude in the following sentence, in which he mimicked their attitude, “We are here, we are daredevils, and we don’t need French discipline!” 1 These men had the best of worlds as far as the military was concerned.  They were able to fly airplanes; they were able to wear any uniforms they wanted (and some of them were quite colorful); they were paid handsomely in comparison with their French comrades by an independent, outside source; they were volunteers, so they knew they did not have to be there; and they were led by French officers who lacked the will power and the means to discipline them except in the most extreme circumstances.  

Although Captain Thenault could be a harsh disciplinarian when forced, he viewed his “task as easy”: I had simply to treat everyone fairly and without favor.” 2 However, the men looked to two others as their real commanding officers, Lieutenant Alfred de Laage de Meux, the French second-in-command of the Lafayette Escadrille, and Lieutenant William “Bill” Thaw, who was considered the leader of the Americans.  In fact, the latter that would command the unit for one month in combat while Thenault took a month of sick leave.  De Laage spoke perfect English, which helped immensely, and he took a great personal interest in the men, especially the new arrivals.  As he told Edwin Parsons upon his arrival to the unit,

“I only ask that you fly well, that you fight hard and that you act as a man.  I demand that you obey, explicitly and without hesitation, any orders I give when I am leading combat patrols…and I expect that you share the responsibility for the upholding the good name of the squadron, and we shall get along quite well.”³  

As for Thaw, the welfare of his pilots was always first and foremost in his mind, whether he was acting as a go-between or as the commanding officer of the unit.  He was only twenty-one years old when he joined the unit, but the men took to him immediately.  He was one of the original, founding members of the Escadrille, and he flew often and hard; they respected him immensely. 4

This was not to say that the men of the Lafayette escadrille necessarily listened to these three men.  Discipline problems on the ground and in the air seemed to have occurred quite regularly.  According to a letter by a surprised, and rather annoyed, pilot named James Rogers McConnell on July 2, 1916, “the Escadrille has a rotten reputation in Paris for drinking.” 5   Arrests, desertions, absences without leave, and other transgressions of the law took place and occurred more than should have been expected from an “elite unit.”  Listening to authority was an issue for most of these men, who knew they were the toast of the town and untouchable.  As one Canadian pilot who had partied with the Lafayette Escadrille at its aerodrome noted,

“From the point of view of discipline, the situation was practically impossible for the French.  Imagine a body of financially well-off Americans – basking in the knowledge that they were volunteers from a neutral country – who habitually played no-limit poker, who imported unlimited booze and food and who comprised a body of men far superior educationally and possessing a far greater experience of the world than their French companions in arms – a French commander would have experienced great difficulty controlling such a body of men if they had been French citizens and fully subject to French Army regulations.  Although the early members of the Escadrille comprised pilots of high potential in every way…their French commander seemed hapless to cope with such independent, high-spirited men.  Moreover, the French Army authorities, not unnaturally, were very anxious to sustain sympathetic responses in the United States.  The General result was that the American pilots enjoyed a wide measure of freedom of action.” 6

And although the men listened or pretended to listen to Captain Thenault, and although they respected Lieutenant deLaage, they could be very severe to anyone they did not like.  Lieutenant de Maison Rouge, the man who replaced deLaage after the latter crashed a plane on takeoff and killed himself, never enjoyed the respect from any of the men. He was a disciplined, much more formal man than deLaage, something the Lafayette Escadrille men did not wish to bother themselves with.  They were quite brutal to him. 7

* * *

The transgressions in discipline varied greatly — from disobeying direct orders in the air, which could lead to deadly results, to serious problems with the civil authorities on the ground. 

A continual source of frustration to the flight commanders of the Lafayette Escadrille was the direct disobedience of orders to remain tightly grouped while in formation and not to break formation to pursue individual combat unless the flight commander so directed.  Leaving on one’s own could prove very dangerous because it set the pilot up, especially a new one, for airborne ruses and traps laid by the Germans.  Indeed, a few of the pilots’ deaths in the Lafayette escadrille were directly attributable to this penchant for breaking ranks in order to pursue combat versus one or multiple aircraft.  Victor Chapman, for one, perished in this manner. 8 Captain Thenault remembers one such incident after he had specifically told his men to remain tightly grouped while in the air, and to wait for his command to attack.

“Soudain, tres loin dans l’est, vers Etain, j’apercus une douzaine de biplaces allemands, survolant leurs propres lignes, et a si faible altitude qu’ils avaient l’air de moutons puissant les prairies vertes, au-deal de la zone ravage par les canons.

Ils etaient trop bas, trop nombreux et trop loin pour que nous risquions une attaque, surtout au cours d’une premiere sortie, d’autant plus qu’ils se tenaient au dessus des positions allemandes.  Mes pilotes n’avaient pas encore pu se familiariser suffisament avec un ennemi qui n’etait certain point meprisable.  Lorsqu’on survole, a basse altitude, en monoplace, en territorie ennemi, il faut toujours craindre l’attaque qui peut venir d’en haut, contre laquelle on est a peu pres sans defense, et qui peut nous oblige a atterir.

Telles etaient mes pensees, lorqu’un pilote, j’ignore encore lequel, piques comme un bolide dans la direction desboches.  Etait-ce de Laage? Etait-ce unautre? Je n’ai jamais pu le asavoir.” 9

According to Thenault, the flight went onto fight the Germans in order to save their comrade.  It quickly became every man for himself, since the Germans were too numerous and had indeed set up a trap from above.  The results were not fatal in this instance, but too often they were.  It is also inexcusable that Captain Thenault did not discipline the man that went astray.  It is certain that he knew who it was because a post-flight debrief would have revealed the culprit.  Captain Thenault was very diplomatic in his memoir and went to length to protect men’s names; but as the squadron commander, he was the one responsible for setting the tone of discipline. 

Breakdowns of discipline on the ground were just as bad, and suggested that the unit was out of control.  Lufbery was arrested in Chartres after severely beating a station attendant.  The attendant had been trying to do his job and asked Lufbery for his identity papers and his ticket, since he was on the train’s first class platform.  He touched Lufbery, who took this as an insult. Lufbery punched him, knocking out six teeth. 10 From jail, Lufbery sent a telegram, “Suis retenu dans un local disciplinaire place de Chartres.” 11 Only Thenault’s intervention saved Lufbery.    

Bert Hall was almost charged as a deserter by Captain Thenault for being gone too long on permission.12 Some of the men would illegally hunt in the woods outside of the aerodrome which was forbidden at the front.  The hunters, chased by the gendarmes, would hide in the squadron bar or in their beds, having others vouch for their innocence. 13

Similar stories abounded about the Lafayette Flying Corps as well.  One man named Eugene Bullard badly beat a superior French officer in the street; although it was questionable as to who started the fight, Bullard was later cleared. 14 Another pilot, Arthur Atten, would be charged as impersonating a French officer. 15 And pilot William Frey was charged as a deserter and never returned to his unit. 16

     Sometimes the less severe breaches of discipline would approach the comical.  One aviator named Harold Willis was shot down and taken prisoner in his green-striped pajamas; in a hurry to launch, he had not felt like putting his uniform on that day.  With no rank and no uniform, he impersonated being an officer; he got away with it until the Germans found out who he really was.  His Escadrille buddies had even helped him by flying over a German aerodrome, dropping a bundle with a uniform with fake officer insignia sown on to it with a note explaining that it was to be forwarded to their embarrassed, hapless comrade.  They had assumed that he would use such a ruse. 17

* * *

One sure sign of an elite unit is that their breaches of discipline are not taken lightly.  There is nothing more frustrating for a unit than to lose personnel and equipment due to poor discipline or recklessness.

Andrew Courtney Campbell was respected by his fellow Lafayette pilots as a skillful and courageous fighter, but his recklessness in the air was also well known and he gave more than one pilot in the Escadrille problems.  When the Lafayette Escadrille was stationed at Senard aerodrome, approximately 60 aircraft based at the field had to share the single long runway for take off and landing operations.  Orders had been given to taxi all the way down to the end of the runway instead of turning off the runway early since that action would not allow for sufficient separation between aircraft landing and taking off.  One day, however, when Campbell brought his aircraft down after a mission and elected to turnoff early in order to return directly to the unit’s parking spaces and ramp.  Knowingly disobeying a standing safety order, Campbell slowed his aircraft just enough to swing his Spad around to taxi off.  A pilot of a large Sopwith landing behind him had no chance to slow his aircraft down in time and plowed it into the side of Campbell’s.  The propeller of the Sopwith chopped into Campbell’s Spad, eating up the fabric and turning the wing into splinters, eventually stopping just a foot from Campbell’s head.  The aircraft bowled over and shattered into a thousand, unrecognizable pieces, fouling the runway.  Campbell exited from the aircraft and surveyed the damage, then lit a cigarette and proceeded to walk away nonchalantly from the aircraft as if nothing had happened.  Captain Thenault who had witnessed the whole thing was beside himself with anger. He could barely contain his rage as he confronted Campbell on his way to the bar. Whatever Campbell said to Thenault apparently calmed him down, for Campbell would go undisciplined for the transgression. 18

Campbell also had a reputation for being a nuisance in the air, especially during patrols when he would maddeningly get as close as he could to others in formation until he had to be waved off.  Even then, he would come right back, annoying some so much that they could not concentrate on flying.  No amount of pre-flight counseling or threatening could deter him, and he would do it every flight.  Eventually, Campbell took it too far one day and almost caused a serious incident.  He was on patrol with Lieutenant Maison Rouge and decided to top his usual antics.  He proceed to fly directly over Maison Rouge’s aircraft, bringing the wheels and fixed landing gear dangerously close to Maison Rouge’s upper wing, in an apparent attempt to bounce up and down on the latter’s aircraft.  To Maison Rouge’s bewilderment, and to Campbell’s surprise, he went too far and managed to get his wheels firmly stuck into the fabric of Maison Rouge’s upper wing.  The unfunny antic became much worse as both realized they were stuck fast together; all attempts to pull away from either aircraft failed to work.  Since the pilots could not see each other they could not communicate and there was no recourse available to them since aviators at this time did not carry parachutes.  Finally, in a desperate attempt, Campbell pulled his aircraft up with brute force and ripped away from Maison Rouge’s plane, tearing apart his upper wing.  Maison Rouge, the second-in-command, was livid; he was able to land his plane but it would have to be junked.  Campbell smiled as if nothing had happened, and for some unknown reason, he again went unpunished. 19

When Captain Thenault was driven to punish a man he could do so, but sometimes his choice of punishment was questionable.  One pilot who had a known case of the nerves crashed an aircraft on landing into a ditch that had been briefed as a known obstacle to avoid by the men.  Captain Thenault was so enraged by this that he bewilderingly punished the man by ordering him to return to another base and to ferry back another airplane; why the man was not grounded as punishment is a mystery.  The shaken man did as ordered, and upon return to the airfield crashed the second plane into the exact same ditch, just a few meters away from the scene of the other crash.  Captain Thenault was incredulous, and finally grounded the man.  He was asked to leave the unit shortly afterwards. 20

It was not only the Americans that were causing problems and acting reckless.  Lieutenant DeLaage was killed performing a stunt on take off in a brand new Spad.  The plane’s motor stalled 200 feet above the airfield, after he had taken off too steeply, and he spun into the ground and died instantly in front of his squadron mates. 21 

* * *

Some of the pilots dangerously pushed the limits of alcohol and flying.  “They were a pretty hard drinking kind, some of them,” Parsons noted. 22 And pilot Edmund Genet wrote the following in his diary entry of February 25, 1917,

It was a mighty difficult and quite improbable proposition to keep entirely away from drink with the Escadrille.  If one goes into town any day with one of the fellows it’s impossible from going in and drinking without absolutely being discourteous and incompatible.” 23    

Some pilots took drinking to the extreme.  Lawrence Rumsey was a heavy drinker and it caused him problems.  He was often drunk and unable to fly, spending many of his days hung over.  He repeatedly pushed the limit between drinking and flying, but the final straw happened when he was supposed take part in a squadron mass movement and transfer of aircraft from Luxeuil to Cachy.  The squadron was to take off early in the morning and rendezvous as a whole overhead the aerodrome before proceeding in formation to Cachy.  Rumsey had noticeably taken too much to drink the night before and his fellow squadron mates discouraged him from flying the next morning.  He climbed into his aircraft anyway.  The squadron reunited over the field and noticed Rumsey was missing; they decided he had taken caution and not flown, so they pushed off, proceeding in formation to Cachy.  Later on, after no sign of Rumsey, the unit started to worry.  That evening, Captain Thenault received a phone call from the personnel at Delonge airfield, not too distant from their present location.  Captain Thenault was asked if he had a pilot named Rumsey, which he responded to in the affirmative.  Although Rumsey was alive, they said, there was an apparent “incident.” It turned out that Rumsey had actually taken off with the others in the morning, but had drunkenly missed the rendezvous and so had proceeded on his own.  He had gotten lost and landed at an unknown airfield (Delonge), which was directly opposite the field at Cachy but yet still far behind friendly lines.  Rumsey was convinced he had landed at a German airfield, and as he had been taught to do in such a situation, set his aircraft on fire in order not to compromise the plane.  The French airfield authorities had watched with amazement as the American plane burned for no apparent reason.  This was even too much for Captain Thenault.  Rumsey was asked to leave the unit immediately; he was separated from the military service and returned to the United States. 24

There was a much sadder alcohol-related event that occurred in the Escadrille.  Douglas MacMonagle and Carl Dolan had been in Paris on liberty on September 23, 1917.  Very drunk after a bout of day-long drinking, Dolan escorted MacMonagle back to the train in order to return to Senard.  Dolan had a hard time managing MacMonagle who was trying to escape at each stop on the long train ride home.  Upon their return to base, after a nightlong train ride, MacMonagle escaped from Dolan and went to wake Captain Thenault out of bed.  Thenault, enraged that MacMonagle was drunk, and that he had thrown him out of bed, ordered him out on the first patrol of the morning, less than an hour away.  Thenault in his rage was violating his own standing order that no man should fly the day he returned from liberty in order to avoid such drunken flying incidents.  The men were supposed to get one day of repos before resuming flight operations.  Despite Dolan’s entreaties, MacMonagle suited up for the first flight as ordered.  He took off on patrol at first light.  He was shot down shortly afterwards, receiving a bullet in the back of the head.  To add to the severity of the situation, MacMonagle’s mother was due to arrive to the Front that very day to visit her boy.  She was met at the train station, told what had happened, and attended his funeral with his grief-stricken squadron mates shortly thereafter. 25

* * *

When the Lafayette men transitioned to the USAS, they would be forced to follow the strict discipline that they once had so flouted with the French.  They would no longer be the Prima Donnas, but ordinary pilots like all the others, subject to the same rules and court martial discipline.  The special treatment would end.      

These examples of breaches of discipline do not necessarily condemn all of the men of the Escadrille, but they demonstrate that there were problems with the unit.  Discipline is, of course, key to all military organizations.  The lack of discipline of the members of the Lafayette Escadrille, suggest that there were other problems existing within the unit.  

Distrust in the Ranks 

When the guns of August erupted in 1914, many believed that the war would end quickly.  But the war neglected the general’s timetables and dragged on for years.  For the pilots in the air services, the stress of flying day after day with no end in sight would prove very strenuous, and many suffered from combat fatigue.  Besides the strain of being pioneers in a new dimension, the men of the Lafayette Escadrille were constantly at the Front in combat, with no break or with little respite.  The men were allowed to occasionally return to Paris for some rest and relaxation, but they always had to return to the grind of day after day flying. Sometimes these men flew three or four times a day in search of the enemy.  Some dealt with this stress better than others.  Some had serious problems with the stress, and though some could hide the fear and fatigue, others were not as successful. Unfortunately, the latter overtly exhibited their fear, and began to become imaginative in their efforts to not fly or fight.  This caused serious problems within the Lafayette Escadrille, and some of the men were kicked out of the unit, creating animosity that would never mend.

* * *

Fear can have a serious detrimental effect on the dynamics of a unit.  No one wants to fly with someone who will duck out of a fight, and every pilot needs to know that his wingman will be there no matter what happens.  In the heat of combat, the load needs to be shared as well; if men are not flying due to fear, others are forced to carry their burden, adding to the stress of all. There were five or six men of the original 38, nearly one sixth of the unit, who had such problems.  These men were ill regarded by the Lafayette Escadrille; they did not like to think that their unit was weak, and they especially hated having these men as representatives of the United States acting cowardly in front of the French and other Allies.  These men were notorious and readily identifiable.  Bert Weston Hall and Elliot Cowdin were two of the original members who fit this bill.  Chouteau Johnson was another early member of the Escadrille, and Hewitt, Rumsey, and Drexel rounded out the rest. 

Bert Weston Hall was considered by far the most notorious member of the Escadrille, a man who was “regarded with suspicion” from the start and who was known as an outright liar. 26 He had a mysterious career before the war as a jack-of-all-trades; his origins were murky since he constantly changed his story.  When the war broke out in Europe, he had left his job in Paris as a taxi driver in order to join the French Foreign Legion, and by all accounts performed well.  He befriended William Thaw and Kiffin Rockwell in the Legion, and when they went off to join the French Air Service, he managed to go as well, claiming that he had had prior flying time.  Upon his arrival to flight school he kept up the charade, until his instructors insisted he demonstrate his flying skills.  He climbed into a training aircraft and proceeded to roll down the runway until he crashed into the side of a barn, ruining the plane.  Flabbergasted, the French instructors accused him of never having flown before, and Hall confessed.  They were so enamored with his bravery, however, that they allowed him to keep flying.  There was still enough suspicion surrounding his persona that the French assigned two counterintelligence men to pose as pilots in order to follow him through training.  The two undercover agents even bunked next to him.  27

Bert Hall was picked as one of the seven original members of the Lafayette Escadrille and helped initiate the unit.  He flew his share of flights, even allegedly getting the squadron’s second kill.  But, as Paul Ayres Rockwell, Kiffin Rockwell’s brother recounts,

“He didn’t fly for very long.  The first months he did a good deal of flying.  But after Victor Chapman was killed, he was often very ill.  He couldn’t go out on patrol.  I remember he had one of his teeth pulled out, one after another, so he could get off flying for a day or two.  He had his teeth pulled out! When he found out it was a serious game, he lost his heart for it.” 28

 

Amongst the aviators of the Escadrille, Bert Hall was a constant source of irritation.  His basic problem was that he had an abrasive, almost repulsive personality that made him something of a misfit amongst his mostly cultured colleagues. 29 To add to his personality problems, Hall became a shirker and a coward unable to pull his weight.  This really bothered the men of the Lafayette Escadrille and it brought down their collective morale.  

James Rogers McConnell reported that he “predicted that Hall follow in the footsteps of Cowdin (another shirker) and take “the cure” (a euphemism for a recuperative prolonged leave or release from service) but it’s hard to say. As we all know he’s an awful liar and hot air artist, and every time he sees a fire on the ground he comes racing back to report bringing down a Boche.” 31 McConnell also reports how “Hall was so long overdue (from a permission) that Captain Thenault insisted on reporting him as a deserter. He’s back now, with a yarn about chasing a spy for four days.” 32

Finally the men of the Layette Escadrille could take it no more; Bert Hall was “asked to leave.” This was a fairly rare event and one that must have been embarrassing for the unit to have to endure, but by all accounts it was necessary.  As Bert Hall left he shook his fist at the men of the Lafayette escadrille, “You’ll hear from me yet!” Hall went on to join another Escadrille where he allegedly shot down another plane, but he must have had enough of war because he was released from service.  Ostensibly, this was so he could pursue other adventures.  He would go off around the world fighting for the Russians and the Chinese, become a hero many times over and receive decorations from all of the countries he fought for — or so he said.  The two books that he wrote, En l’Air and One Man’s War, are tall tales full of fabrications.  They are generally regarded as unreliable.  He went onto Hollywood to be an advisor for aviation movies; he wrote a bunch of fanciful articles regarding his exploits that the Lafayette men later had to debunk; and he involved himself in various scams and schemes, all of which brought great discredit to the Lafayette Escadrille.  He eventually was caught in one of his embezzlement scams and had to serve two and a half years in prison for making off with substantial amount money from a Chinese general, an event that almost caused an international scene.  All of this caused untold damage to the reputation of the Lafayette Escadrille.  To top it off, three women claiming to be Bart Hall’s wife showed up on the day of the dedication of the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial. 

Elliot Cowdin was another poor representative of the Lafayette Escadrille.  Cowdin had served with another French escadrille before joining the Lafayette Escadrille.  While thrice cited as “excellent, brave, (and) devoted,” he was no such thing.  His squadron mates were not of the same accord. 33 Paul Rockwell, the eventual official historian of the Lafayette Escadrille, stated that “some of his fellow pilots that I have spoken to said he always played up to his commanding officers and obtained citation for work he had not done and medals he had not gained, by buying champagne for his captains.  They told me that most of his flying was done in bars.” 34 He had penchant for taking long and not always authorized leaves, most of them were due to his “nerves” which were frayed from combat patrols.  On June 21, 1916, just over two months after the Lafayette Escadrille had been founded, McConnell wrote to Paul Rockwell a letter stating that “Cowdin’s trying for a month’s leave.  Strain too great for his delicate nerves.” 35 Even more shocking, but demonstrating the vitriol that Cowdin produced in his squadron mates, McConnell wrote another letter to Paul Rockwell, dated June 25, 1916, commenting on pilot Chapman’s death, “If it only could have been someone else – Cowdin, for instance, or any like him.” 36 These are rather hateful thoughts for anyone to discuss, and doubly so when wished upon a squadron mate. 

One of those prolonged, unauthorized absences by Cowdin brought about his expulsion from the unit.  Captain Thenault wanted to charge him as a deserter, but did not want the bad publicity, so he ordered him “released due to ill health.”  In Lafayette pilots James Norman Hall’s and Charles Nordhoff’s The Lafayette Flying Corps, which is regarded as the most authoritative first person histories of the men that flew for France, the euphemism “released due to ill health” was explained as a catchall phrase used to protect the reputation of the designee.  It was a polite way for undesirable men to be kicked out of the unit, while allowing them a measure of honor.  This is what McConnell’s letter alluded when he predicted, “Hall would follow the same cure taken by Cowdin.” 37 Cowdin quit the French Air Service in October of 1916 after initially spending some time in Paris “recuperating.” He briefly served in the RFC, ferrying and delivering planes to the French.  He returned to the United States towards the end of the war and was accepted as a major in the USAS, put in charge of inspecting airfields.  He was finally discharged for good in 1919. 38

Thomas Hewitt was another Lafayette Escadrille member that proved to be less than courageous.  He was no shirker however; it was just deemed that he lacked the qualities that make men fighter pilots.  Surprisingly he had done very well in the French fighter schools and everyone expected great things of him.  He was aggressive in flying and tactics and excelled in all the stages of training.  He was picked for the Lafayette Escadrille with great enthusiasm. 39

He proved to be a huge disappointment.  After the first flight with the Escadrille over enemy lines he became so unnerved by antiaircraft artillery that he landed ten miles short of the airfield and did not know where he was.  Hewitt’s lack of courageousness and inability to confront the enemy was soon noted and frowned upon by his squadron mates who expected everyone to shoulder their fare share of the burden.  He soon became known as “Horrible Hewitt” and he shrank further and further from his combat responsibilities.  He was so unnerved that he started experiencing problems even on non-combat flights.  Hewitt was the pilot that had twice crashed his plane in the ditch.  Thenault subsequently grounded him and he was never put back on the flight schedule.  On September 17, 1917, Captain Thenault removed Hewitt from the squadron roster and he was assigned to bombers.  He washed out of that program and was released from the service due to “ill health.”  He died alone, an alcoholic, unclaimed in a Washington, D.C. morgue. 40

Chouteau Johnson was a different type of case; he fought and flew with Lafayette Escadrille for fourteen months and held an average record.  A letter from McConnell to Paul Rockwell on June 15, 1916, noted that, “Johnson and Rumsey frankly dislike the game.” 41 Edmond Genet noted in his diary on numerous occasions that Johnson was a shirker and always looking to get out of his flying missions.  Genet called him “decidedly lazy” 42 and in a longer entry spared no disgust in his description of him,

“Am mighty well disgusted with one of the fellows here of whom I have mentioned before.  (Johnson) is not an enthusiastic fighter and takes every possible chance to shirk, while we break our necks and risk our lives to keep up the good name of the Escadrille.  (Johnson) I’m certain will see the finish of the war, return to America, and pose as the hero of the Escadrille and be received by everyone – who will know the difference?”43

 

Genet’s prediction would come to pass.  Genet died shortly thereafter, killed in combat while Chouteau Johnson would survive the war.  He was not hated like Bert Hall, and many of the Escadrille men liked him, although they considered him somewhat of a shirker.  He died from throat cancer in 1939.

There were a few other men in the Lafayette Escadrille who had problems with courage.  Lawrence Rumsey, a problem drinker, chose to hide his fear behind alcohol.  He was asked to leave the unit after burning his plane.  Clyde Balsley was wounded almost immediately after joining the Escadrille, and his wounds would cause him to be invalided for the length of the war.  He was nevertheless known for his lack of courage and was described “as needing a new pair of shorts every time that he goes out.” 44 Another fellow named John Drexel lasted only 36 days in the Lafayette Escadrille before he used his wealthy father’s influence to be reassigned to a liaison office.  According to Edwin Parsons, “John Drexel made no patrols over the lines.” He was effeminate, different, very aloof, an immediate oddball in the Escadrille, but more importantly he lacked the mettle for combat.  When he discovered that the war was for real, he chose to get out of it.  45

Another account is frankly startling; however, it shows the extent to which the reputation of the unit was at stake and demonstrates how despised shirkers and cowards really were.  Pilot Charles Dolan, in an USAF Oral History Program interview on August 15, 1968, related the following incredible story, 

“There was one incident where this fellow would be in a patrol, and he’d fly until they crossed the (enemy) line, and then he’d drop out with engine trouble or something and come home.  The next day he’d drop out because the sun had blinded him or something.  At any rate he would fly along the lines, and when the squadron had come back over the lines, he’d drop in place.  This got so bad that at the end of about a month the fellows shot him down – his own man shot him down. (!) They did not want any French men to think that they had these kinds of Americans.  So he’s among the missing, and his record is unnamed in the history of the Escadrille.”  46 

Dolan never named the pilot in question who was shot down, but if true, the story is incredible.  A murder was committed to save the reputation of the Lafayette Escadrille, and to punish a coward.  This action speaks powerfully of the distrust these shirkers caused in the ranks.       

Dissension in the Ranks

To add to the poor discipline and distrust, there were serious dissension problems in the Lafayette Escadrille.  There was a fundamental split in the unit that separated the majority of the men into two groups.  This split did not involve everybody, for some never chose sides, but it was palpable enough that a pilot from a Canadian unit noted that, “The pilots give the impression of being very war-like, even amongst themselves…there was tendency to resolve themselves into cliques, wherein individuals of similar tendencies grouped and lambasted the others.  Consequently teamwork suffered.” 47 One historian thinks that the cliques centered around northern and southern American origins, a very real possibility considering that the major protagonists in the unit came from wealthy, well-to-do northern families or rich, southern traditionalist families with roots dating back to the American Civil War. 48 

The Lafayette Escadrille contained many colorful characters who enjoyed their spot in the limelight.  When the Escadrille was first organized, its inception was met with great fanfare.  The men were the darlings of the world, and enjoyed special attention in Paris.  In the early days of the Escadrille, Parisians could not get enough of them; countless articles were written about them and a film crew even did a brief documentary of the Escadrille pilots.  They were admired by all and envied by many.

It was natural that the young men would let some of this attention get to them.  Some of them craved the attention like an addiction and wanted more.  To add to the attention and competition for glory, “there was an established system of rewards for citations and decorations” as well. 48 (Gros, p. 6) This hopelessly tainted the innocence of the men’s intentions.  The sums rewarded were not small for a pilot who earned “nine sous a day” and an additional “franc a day” as recorded by the “Carnets de comptabilite de campagne.”49 (The men did receive an additional 100 francs a month, later increased to 200 francs a month, from the Franco-American Flying Corps run by Dr. Gros and associates, as their mess fund.) The prizes were distributed as follows, 

Legion d’Honneur –1,500 francs (or $300.00)

Medaille Militraire – 1,000 francs (or $200.00)

Croix de Guerre — 500 francs (or $100.00)

Citation — 250 francs (or $50.00)

Downing an enemy aircraft – 1,000 francs (or $200.00) 50

One can see how lucrative a victory, medal, or a citation could be.  No wonder men were accused of buttering up their superiors in order to obtain confirmations or award recommendations.  To add to the glory, the man who downed a plane in the Escadrille would usually have a special byline and picture of him in the front page of the world’s newspapers, or at least certainly on the front page of the Paris-based New York Herald, the America daily newspaper and predecessor to the International Herald Tribune.  This extra, free publicity would make the man the toast of the town the next time he came to Paris on leave or liberty.  This type of coverage was especially popular in the beginning the war when the aviation service was still considered the new bright spot in the war and the chivalrous replacement to the cavalry. 51                                                                                   

* * *

The center of the competition and dissension in the unit revolved around two of the Lafayette Escadrille’s most dashing, young men, and who were both in the Escadrille from the start: Norman Prince and Kiffin Yates Rockwell.  Educated at the best schools, from well-to-do families with rich traditions, these young men had given up everything, including their safe lives back home in order to volunteer in war effort. 

Norman Prince had spent much of his time growing up with his father in the south of France at Pau.  The father owned significant property in that region, and would eventually donate the tract of land that would one day field the Pau Aerodrome.  Kiffin Rockwell had come from a family of fighters, and could trace his military ancestors back to the American Revolution.  He had enlisted in the French Foreign Legion before transferring to the French Air Service.

As similar as they were in background, the two seemed at odds with each other and the cliques would revolve around these two young protagonists.  Unfortunately, for the unit, the dissension they created would carry long past both of their deaths.    

Kiffin Rockwell scored the Escadrille’s first victory on May 13, 1916, a feat that would land him in the record books of the unit.  Prince’s first kill took a while longer to achieve.  He claimed as his first victory, on August 25, 1916, to have single handedly brought down a German Aviatik two-seater during a battle that took place six miles inside German lines, and that he forced another plane to land behind enemy lines. 52 When he flew back, several of the pilots did not believe his story, but Captain Thenault allowed his victory and recommended him for the Medaille Militaire. 53 It was this claim that spurred hostility between Rockwell and Prince.  Rockwell thought for sure that Prince had curried favor with Captain Thenault and was unjustly cited, while his own recent efforts had been overlooked.  In a letter to his brother he stated as much, saying that “no one thinks that Prince got a German…I am going to have to call him out when he gets back (from Paris) as he talked awfully big about us behind my back when I was away.  We have all agreed to try to get him kicked out of the Escadrille.” 54

Although it is not clear who “we all” is, it is very clear that Rockwell was not happy that Prince was grabbing his share of the glory.  No one was questioning Lufbery’s kills, which already numbered four at this point.  Rockwell was unreasonably steamed about Prince’s claims and subsequent recognition, for he started blaming everyone and everything for his lack of recent success.  He even blamed Captain Thenault for his problems.  Kiffin, in a letter to this brother, Paul Rockwell, said,

“My citation has not gone through, so can’t send you a copy yet.  Don’t think there is much doubt of the medaille, but don’t expect two citations.  There is no reason why I shouldn’t have them, except we are very unlucky in having a captain who is a nice fellow and brave, but doesn’t know how to look after his men, and doesn’t try to.  I have been fighting with him ever since being back (from an injury), mainly about the fact that I have no machine, and he gave my old one to Prince (of all insults!) and is not in a hurry to get me a new one.  I think that in a few weeks I will be plenty sick of this outfit.” 55

He had already been promoted to sergeant and awarded the Medaille Militaire and the Croix de Guerre for actions completed, but his anger and his suspicions seemed to have clouded his head for on August 31, 1916, he wrote to his brother, Paul,

“I want to be changed to a French Escadrille unless certain conditions change here… I want a legion d’honneur and a sous-lieutenant’s grade.  I don’t give a d___ how conceited it may appear, but I think that I have well earned the two… Everyone here is unhappy and discontented and I am about the worst of any.” 56 

Rockwell questioned Prince’s sincerity and believed that his motive for helping found and serving with the Escadrille was for his own personal glory.  Rockwell had fought 40 official air duels without a kill in August of 1916 when he wrote the above letters, and it is possible that the stress of not getting a victory was getting to him. 57  

Prince was described as being “in it for the sport,” rather than for fierce idealistic reasons, but so were others, and one could argue that at least he was there. 58 He was a brave young man full of vigor and pride, but so then were many others in the Escadrille.  The only criticism the author found of Prince came from a relative, who said that he was myopic, but vain enough that he refused to wear corrective lenses — Norman Prince exclaiming, “No ace wears glasses!” 59  

Whatever the cause of the discord, the two men did not get along.  This is not surprising by itself, but when testimony from outside sources note that the unit appears to be split into feuding cliques centered on distinct personalities, then the unit has a problem.  This animosity detracted from the unit and served to undermine its potential greatness.  As the friction between the two men was coming to a head, they each had less than two months to live.  Rockwell would die first, shot down by a German.  Prince would die soon after, after hitting a wire upon approach to the airfield.  Ironically, the man who refused to wear glasses did not see the wire in the dimming light.  His plane flipped over and he was mortally injured, dying days later. Huge funerals were held for both men, and many turned out to honor the young heroes.  In death they would find peace from their differences.  Little did anyone know that the Rockwell and Prince names would surface again as protagonists in a bitter dispute after the war. 

The Dissension and Discord Carry on after the War 

The dissension and discord in the Escadrille would spill over into the years after the war, especially during a very memorable time for the unit, the erection and dedication of the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial.  This time the discord centered on two main issues; the first concerned the Prince name and the erection of the Memorial.  The second also involved the Memorial, but this time the differences were between the Lafayette Escadrille and the Lafayette Flying Corps.

The Rockwell-Prince Saga Continues 

When Kiffin Rockwell and Norman Prince died, the country of France mourned for them as if they had lost their own sons.  And the Lafayette Escadrille was the less due to the loss of two of its famous members.  Many hoped that the rivalry that had split the two apart would finally be laid to rest.  Unknown to the Lafayette Escadrille at the time, another Prince would carry on the fight of the family name.          

Frederick Henry Prince, Norman’s father, was a very wealthy man.  Despite his vast holdings and interests in France, he had violently disagreed with his son’s departure to France to fight; in fact, he tried to use his influence, unbeknownst to Norman, to have him transferred to a rearward position.  Norman Prince had been Frederick Prince’s favorite son, and he had hoped that one day Norman would take over the family business.  Norman’s rebellious move to run off and join the war effort upset his father’s plans for him. 

Upon Norman’s death, Mr. Prince embraced his fallen son and sought to glorify his son’s deeds.  Norman’s death became an obsession for the old man (despite having another older son and namesake, Frederick Prince, Jr., in the Lafayette Escadrille who he inexplicably shunned).  The father was an obsessive, complicated, petty man who bullied people to have his way.  His efforts to glorify his son at the expense of others drove the Escadrille members mad with rage. 

Mr. Prince’s efforts started almost immediately after Norman’s death.  His primary intent was to make sure that history accorded his son Norman as the sole person responsible for the founding of the Lafayette Escadrille.  He would also seek to embellish and enlarge his son’s record, to the detriment of the others.  First, Mr. Prince he financed and published a book in 1917 entitled, Norman Prince, a Volunteer who Died for the Cause he Loved which he financed and published himself in 1917.  The book is full of praise for his dead son, but it also, unfortunately, contained a lot of misleading statements and claims.  The surviving members of the Escadrille, understandably, took exception to the errors.  The most egregious misstatement was that Norman was the sole founder of the Lafayette Escadrille.  The men of the Lafayette Escadrille were understandably upset since Mr. Prince was beating everyone to the punch by publishing these claims while they were still fighting in the war.  The American public back home, eager to hear stories from the Front, readily gobbled up these claims. 60

Mr. Prince’s efforts continued after the war.  In 1921, Captain Georges Thenault unwittingly turned over his memoir L’Escadrille Lafayette, to Mr. Prince to have it translated and published in the United States.  A letter from Paul Rockwell, Kiffin’s older brother who also served in France and who always maintained very close ties with the Escadrille, captures the anger and frustration that the men of the Lafayette Escadrille expressed at the doctored translation,

     “I mailed you yesterday my copies of the two editions of Georges Thenault’s story of the Lafayette Escadrille; the authentic Paris edition, and the edition altered by the Prince family and published in Boston.  I am enclosing these with some articles covering the affair.  I have many others but these will give an idea of how the father and the uncle of Norman Prince attempted to glorify him by suppressing Thenault’s account of good work done by William Thaw and other pilots of the Lafayette Escadrille. 

     “When you read Chapter One of Thenault’s book as he wrote it, you will note that he considered Thaw the originator of the plan for the Escadrille of Americans volunteers in the service of France.  I agree entirely with Thenault, and I knew Thaw intimately from August 1914, until his death.  I must admit for a number of years following World War I, I like many others, was very sentimental about the fellows who had been killed during the War, and I often gave Norman Prince credit for founding the Lafayette Escadrille, although I knew Bill Thaw had the idea long before Prince ever came to France and volunteered.

     “I had a long talk with Thaw sometime before the end of World War I, regarding the efforts of the Prince family to glorify Norman Prince and the extravagant claims made for him.  Thaw’s comment was, “Let Norman have all the credit they wish to give him.  He was dead, I am alive, and I enjoy living.” But after I learned that the Prince’s were not only making unjustified claims for Norman (“sole founder of the Lafayette Escadrille,”etc.); but were deliberately suppressing credit given William Thaw and others pilots for work well done, my attitude changed.  It was not Thaw’s fault that he survived the war, he faced death as often and as bravely as did Norman Prince and my brother Kiffin and the others that were killed.” 61  

Thaw, a known even hand and important member of the Escadrille who never succumbed to joining the cliques in the unit, had even at the end of the war tried to remain neutral, but his neutrality did not last for long. 

Meanwhile, Mr. Prince had stepped up his efforts to glorify his son’s role in the Lafayette Escadrille.  In May of 1923, the “L’Association du Memorial de L’Escadrille Lafayette” was founded to commemorate the efforts of the Lafayette Escadrille and the Lafayette Flying Corps.  A large fund raising drive featuring many circulars was conducted in order to raise money.  Prominent men of France and the Unites States backed the memorial and raised and donated funds themselves.  Mr. Prince became a member of the association’s board due to his financial clout and influence, and by donating a huge sum of money.  But from the very start, a war broke out between the formerly neutral William Thaw and Paul Rockwell and Mr. Prince, which endured through the duration of the construction of the Memorial, due to be unveiled and dedicated July 4, 1928.  This was a five-year test of words and wills that unfortunately sullied the memory of the Memorial and the men it was dedicated to, and likewise caused animosity for years afterwards.   

Mr. Prince bullied the members of the Association with his financial clout and unveiled threats, which included former members of the Lafayette Escadrille and Lafayette Flying Corps, among them Austin Crehore, and associates such as Paul Rockwell and Dr. Gros.  Mr. Prince, as a primary provider of the Memorial, wanted the monument to be erected in the memory of his son, Norman.  In his idea for the memorial, Norman Prince would be featured as the main attraction, a tomb with Norman’s remains would be the centerpiece.  The rest of the men would be honored too, but they would be ancillary to Norman, their tombs or names featured as a backdrop or as part of the scenery.  The men were dumbfounded; although they had no problem with Norman Prince, they certainly did not hold him in higher esteem than any of the other members of the Lafayette Escadrille.  Above all, the Memorial was meant to honor all those who had fought and served. 62

Thaw and Rockwell led the charge against Prince’s efforts.  They rallied the support of the other men involved in the memorial’s construction and proved to be an effective counter-force against Prince’s power and influence.  As the construction of the monument proceeded, they managed to override Mr. Prince’s demands, but he stayed on as a member of the Association, attempting to influence the monument in his son’s favor.  A review of the Association’s minutes of meetings and the correspondence sent between members of the Association’s Board reveal an embattled Mr. Prince vainly fighting for his son’s cause.  Finally, in a series of letters dated May 4, May 25, and June 6, 1928, on the very eve of the Memorial’s dedication, Mr. Prince quit the Association and attempted to blame his resignation on another of the Board members, although it was evident that he was unhappy with the monument’s final form.  Too late to withdraw his funding, he made sure everyone knew he felt slighted.  In letters to certain Board members, he described how he had been “insulted by (Austen Crehore) and offended by him, as he offends everyone else,” and how “purely personal the affront was,” and that he was giving the board his letter of resignation. 63 He subsequently pulled out the remainder of his funding, and left to search for another site to memorialize his son. 

The surviving members of the Lafayette Escadrille were happier for his departure.  As Paul Rockwell put it, “We have weathered successfully many storms, such as the attempt of the Prince family to take away from us the Memorial at Garches to all of our dead, and turn it into a memorial for one pilot only.” 64 However, the fight that had broken out over the Lafayette Escadrille soured the beauty of the monument’s purpose, and others found that the fight was still not over with the Prince family. 

William Thaw, in response to an article written by Mr. Prince in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, wrote the following letter to the editor published on May 11, 1929.  Thaw had taken exception to the excessive claims laid out in the Prince article and sought to rectify the record,

     “I am taking the liberty to writing you relative to your editorial of Thursday, April 25th, on the subject of the service of Norman Prince with the Lafayette Escadrille…without wanting to in any way detract from the good work done by Prince while with the Lafayette Escadrille, I do wish to correct your figures.  You wrote that he “fought 122 engagements and was credited with five enemy planes, and with four others not officially rewarded.” 

“I was with the Lafayette Escadrille as second in command under Captain  Thenault, now French Air Attaché at Washington, during the period of Prince’s sojourn therewith, and during that time (I have before me the official records) the entire squadron had 156 aerial combats, and destroyed officially 17 enemy planes, for three of which Prince was given credit….

“It is illogical to assume that any one pilot actively participated in 80% of the squadron’s combats and over 53% of its victories….” 65

  In some ways the fight against the Prince’s was less direct.  Paul Rockwell once stated in a letter dated November 8, 1959, that “I always felt I could not write an important history of the unit, some of the fellows (not many) I did not like and I might not be fair to them.” 66 He was right.  In his book American Fighters in the Foreign Legion, 1914 -1918, Paul Rockwell mentions Norman Prince only once in his whole book (in a copy of a citation), while his brother Kiffin, is mentioned over 50 times. 67            

These, and other efforts and letters, are some of the examples of how Lafayette Escadrille members would have to defend the true history of their unit.  The main effort would be directed against Mr. Prince who continued to champion his son until his death.  It was with great irony that neither Norman Prince, Kiffin Yates Rockwell, nor William Thaw would be buried at the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial.  Kiffin Rockwell was left in his original burial spot, in the town of Luxeuil.  Thaw was buried in his hometown of Pittsburgh.  And Prince would eventually get his own memorial.

Mr. Prince, after being rebuked by the Association, pushed hard for a $500,000 memorial dedicated entirely to his son at Ft. Meyer in Washington, D. C., but he was rebuffed by base officials.  He finally used his influence to have his son’s remains buried in the Washington National Cathedral, in Washington, D. C.   Norman Prince’s remains lay in a prominent chapel inside the cathedral, where a statue of him and his crypt glisten in white stone.  Prince is in august surroundings, of which heads of state like Woodrow Wilson are buried.  The chapel was dedicated in 1937; Norman Prince’s remains were transferred from France and entombed there.  Mr. Prince strove until the end to promote his son’s role in the Escadrille; indeed, for all visitors who come to this site and see the tomb, engraved on the side are the following words:

NORMAN PRINCE

Founder of the Lafayette Escadrille

Among the first to lead where the nation followed in the World War 68

  The Lafayette Escadrille versus the Lafayette Flying Corps 

On the eve of the dedication of the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial, a gathering was held for the survivors of the Lafayette Escadrille and the Lafayette Flying Corps.  They met at the Hotel Chatham, a favorite gathering place for the Lafayette men during the war.  They gathered to fete the unveiling of the monument that would honor their fallen brethren in perpetuity.  Although they had had no official recognition in the United States, they knew this memorial would help the memory of their feats endure.                   

However, the gathering was not as festive as the members would have liked it to be.  An argument broke out between the pilots.  One of the Lafayette Escadrille pilots had accused the Lafayette Flying Corps members of trying “to steal the thunder” of the Lafayette Escadrille;  other Lafayette Escadrille pilots seconded the opinion.  The Flying Corp pilots took exception to this.  Additionally, some pilots believed that no one still alive should be on the monument, and that it should just be a memorial to those who died in combat.  Some were upset because some of their comrades had not made the monument’s list of names to be etched on the Memorial; others were mad at some of the names that were to be included.  Finally Austen Crehore, a member of the Lafayette Flying Corps, and a board member of the Association of the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial, took the floor and made a calming speech, “We have brought you our dead, don’t exclude them.  We all fought for the same cause.” But the controversy would not subside, and a great deal of bickering would haunt the Lafayette Escadrille and Flying Corps members for years to come. 69    

* * *

Many of the 10,000 attendees, to include French notables such as Marshal’s Foch and Petain, at the next day’s dedication ceremony of the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial, had no idea of the controversy overshadowing the Memorial they were about to unveil.  The names of the Lafayette Escadrille and the Lafayette Flying Corps members were yet to be added to the Memorial at this point; no one was quite sure how to appropriately address this issue.  Some of the Lafayette Escadrille members thought that only the original 38 members of the unit plus the French officers that commanded them, should be included on the Memorial.  The members of the Lafayette Flying Corps rightly thought they had a reason to be on the monument as well.  They fought the same air battles at the same time for the same ally.  But what really constituted inclusion into the Lafayette Flying Corps? Was it only the 180 who had only served in combat at the Front? Or was it all of the 269 estimated men that had gone through French training, even the ones who never reached the front? Why not include those who had died during training in accidents; had they not too paid the ultimate sacrifice? Was it to consist of pilots who had volunteered in good faith, but who were then dropped from the roles of fight school due to inaptitude, sickness, or injuries due to training? The decision was difficult and no one had the perfect solution.

The case of Eugene Bullard is one such case in point and exemplifies the dissension over the Memorial.  Bullard was America’s first black pilot, and the only black pilot in the Lafayette Flying Corps.  Bullard had been a professional boxer before the war and had gone to France to find a better life amongst the more racially unbiased French.  He enlisted in the French Foreign Legion when the war started.  He was wounded on March 5, 1916, by shrapnel and he subsequently received a citation and a Croix de Guerre with a bronze star.  He applied for aviation since his wound gave him trouble marching and he was accepted.  By all accounts he performed well in flight school, which he had started September 3, 1916.  He served with SPA-93 from August 27, 1917 to September 13, 1917, and with SPA-85 from September 13, 1917 to November 11, 1917. 70

Bullard was well liked and had friends in the Escadrille.  A letter from Edmond Genet on March 26, 1917, who befriended Bullard in the French Foreign Legion, expressed his fondness for Bullard, and applauded him in “coming on so well with the flying” and that he hears he is “so near to being brevete.” 71                   

Unfortunately for Bullard, an event happened that would haunt his reputation with the Lafayette for the remainder of his life.  Bullard was in Montmatre on permission with a black friend and two ladies when they got into an argument with a French officer and a British officer.  The French Officer and Bullard escalated the argument and they came to blows.  Bullard being a professional boxer easily thrashed the French Officer; however the troubles were just beginning.  Bullard was arrested and charged with striking a French officer, with wearing a fourragere from the French Foreign Legion illegally, and using brass knuckles in his fight.  He was threatened with imprisonment, but eventually released on all counts. 72

The incident was unfortunately brought to the attention of Lafayette Flying Corps officials.  The condemnation from Dr. Gros, who had a particular dislike for Bullard, was swift. 73 In a letter from Dr. Gros to Captain W. W. Hoffman, Headquarters, AEF, on November 16, 1917, Gros showed his lack of support for Bullard,

My Dear Captain Hoffman,

     The Bullard dilemma has ended with a very graceful solution.  Bullard who is a former prizefighter, knocked out a French adjutant for which he was given ten days prison.  He was assigned two more for allegedly wearing the Fourragere to which he was only entitled to as a member of the Foreign Legion. 

 This leads to his total radiation from the Aviation Section of the French Army and to his transfer to the ranks of the French infantry.

Under these conditions you will consider of course that he is morally unfit to form a part of the United States Army and you can reject him on these     grounds.

At least one dark cloud is dispersed from our horizon. 7   

               In another letter from Dr. Gros to Bullard, he wrote,

               I received your letter announcing your very unfortunate experience in getting into fisticuffs.  There is no excuse for such a lack of dignity, and this,                  unfortunately will be strongly placed against you. 

   I can do nothing to attenuate the predicament which you have very rightly   incurred from the French Military Authorities.” 75

Bullard was kicked out of the Lafayette Flying Corps due to this incident and due to Dr. Gros’ failure to defend him.  He finished the war in the French infantry.  This incident later led to Dr. Gros demand that Bullard be excluded from the Lafayette Escadrille Memorial.  Yet the great Lufbery himself spent ten days in jail — this was a well-known incident.  In fact, the telegram he originally sent from Chartres is still taped to the interior of the Journal des operations et marches at the Smithsonian Institution.  Perhaps this was due to Lufbery’s exceptional record.  However, this would not explain Dr. Gros’ subsequent support for Bert Hall to be included in the ranks of the named.  In a letter to Austen Crehore, Dr. Gros wrote,   

“….One name in question, that of Bert Hall, has lead to many discussions.  My own feeling is that, though Bert Hall may not have ended with all possible glory, he began bravely and was part of the first Escadrille and eventually did something to win fame for this famous body….” 76 

Dr. Gros had no way of knowing that Bert Hall would go on to become a felon and perpetual ne’er-do-well.  However, the reputation of Bert Hall as an unsavory character who lied on numerous occasions and who was asked to leave the Escadrille based solely on character was well documented, and does not explain Gros’ objections to Bullard, who was cleared of all charges against him. 

In the same letter mentioned above from Dr. Gros to Crehore, on May 17, 1929, Gros explained that,

“We feel that those who were killed or seriously injured in training schools and as a result of these accidents were unable to receive the brevet should figure on the list (of the Memorial).  On the contrary, those who, though inaptitude, indiscipline, or even due to health reasons, were unable to obtain their wings, should be left out.” 77   

That men who never flew in combat should be included on the monument to the Lafayette Escadrille (to include Dr. Gros’ name), while men who had served honorably were eschewed is maddening.  Bullard apparently felt so and let those in charge know that he felt slighted.  In a letter from Bullard to Austen Crehore, dated December 17, 1928, he wrote,

     “I am sending you my declaration in which you ask for hoping that there will be no more stumbling blocks which is very very injust (sic) concerning my military record, as I was good enough to fly side by side with and risk my life with a lot of the pilots and soldiers, who lost their life where I might have lost mine.  I feel that it is the most pitefull (sic) thing I have ever heard and I know pilots of my time who well agree with me.” 7 

Bullard’s fight for his right to be included on the Escadrille Memorial included letters from his former commanding officer, and old chief in the Legion, one-armed Colonel Girod, who cited Bullard’s “conduite, sa discipline, (et) son courage.” 79 Bullard also subsequently brought charges of 40, 000 francs against the Chicago Tribune which published an article wrongly depicting the events that transgressed on that fateful day.  In May 1923, the Chicago Tribune settled out of court in favor of Bullard, and ran a front-page apology to Bullard and a correct version of the events. 80

In a letter from Lewis D. Crenshaw of the L’Association du Memorial de L’Escadrille Lafayette to Austen Crehore, dated 19 September 1928, Crenshaw defended Bullard, and saw that “there is nothing in his record from October 1914, to the armistice which should keep him from the honor roll.” He also explained that Bullard never served any jail time for his fisticuffs or fourragere affair, and that the event was remarkably overplayed.  Crenshaw also said that Dr. Gros was the sole reason why Bullard’s name was not on the list. 81

Dr. Gros won in the end.  Bullard’s name was not included.  Bullard died, a member of the Legion D’Honneur, and winner of the Croix de Guerre, a man who had served France for four full years in the Legion, in the air, and on the ground, alone and poor – serving as a forgotten hotel elevator operator in Chicago in his last years. 

In the end, it was decided that of the 269 possible candidates, only 209 would be listed.  There were 60 names omitted, including Bullard’s and Bert Hall’s.  Most of these were of men that had not served at the Front or had never completed flight training.    

The men are all dead now and the argument is mute in hindsight, but that there was dissension to begin with over what names were to be included, and that the argument became public, did nothing to serve the memory of these valiant men.  The bickering could only bring dishonor to the cause they served. 

Summary

Hold any famous unit up for close inspection, and one is bound to find faults.  The Lafayette Escadrille was no different than any other unit; it was composed of mortal men.  Yet, for the observer and historian, it is a sad memory betrothed to their memory. 

The dissension, discord, distrust, and indiscipline found in the Lafayette Escadrille are part of the unit’s history.  And unfortunately it was highlighted when the very men of the Escadrille made their petty rivalries and arguments public.  Perhaps now, it does not seem like a big to do, but at the time, especially when the Lafayette Memorial was to be dedicated to their memory, all of these detractors lessened the legacy of the Lafayette aviators.        

 

 

  1. Flying for France, Modom Productions—France 3, 1999.  Citation du fils de Georges Thenault.
  2. Gordon, Pilot Biographies, p. 230.
  3. Parsons, I Flew, p. 125. 
  4. Gordon, Pilot Biographies, p. 59.
  5. Lettre, date 2 juillet 1916, James R. McConnell à Marcelle Guerin.  James R. McConnell (JRM) Collection, University of Virginia.
  6. Mason, Lafayette Escadrille, p. 128.
  7. Gordon, Pilot Biographies, p. 249.
  8. Parson, I Flew, p. 216.
  9. Thenault, L’Escadrille Lafayette, p. 43.
  10. Ibid., p. 52.
  11. Journal: Escadrille N° 124.
  12. Lettre, date 19 juillet 1916, James R. McConnell to Paul A. Rockwell. JRM Collection.
  13. Parsons, I Flew, p. 148.
  14. Chicago Tribune, 5 mai 1923.
  15. Gordon, The Lafayette Flying Corps, p. 38.
  16. Ibid., p. 121.
  17. Parsons, I Flew, p. 290.
  18. Ibid., p. 270.
  19. Ibid., p. 275.
  20. Ibid., p. 265.
  21. Ibid., p. 250.
  22. Parsons, I Flew, p. 220.
  23. Genet, An American for Lafayette, entrée de journal personnel, daté le 25 février 1917.
  24. Parsons, I Flew, p. 290.
  25. Gordon, Pilot Biographies, p. 226.
  26. Rockwell, Paul A., American Fighters in the Foreign Legion (NY, Hougton, Mifflin, Co., 1930), p. 187. 
  27. Gordon, Lafayette Flying Corps, p. 69.
  28. Rockwell, Paul A., Interview #550: Colonel Paul A. Rockwell (“Cross and Cockade Society”, 1962), p. 7.
  29. Kennett, The First Air War, p. 143.
  30. Lettre, date 1 juillet 1916, James R. McConnell à Paul A. Rockwell.  JRM Collection.
  31. Lettre, date 19 juillet 1916, James R. McConnell à Paul A. Rockwell. JRM Collection.
  32. Gordon, Lafayette Flying Corps.
  33. Gordon, Pilot Biographies, p. 68.
  34. Ibid.
  35. Lettre, date 21 juin 1916, James R. McConnell à Paul A. Rockwell.  JRM Collection.
  36. Lettre, date 25 juin 1916, James R. McConnell à Paul A. Rockwell. JRM Collection.
  37. Lettre, date 1 juillet 1916, James R. McConnell à Paul A. Rockwell. JRM Collection.
  38. Gordon, Pilot Biographies, p. 68. 
  39. Ibid., p. 84.
  40. Ibid., p.191.
  41. Lettre, date 16 juin 1916, James R. McConnell à Paul A. Rockwell.  JRM Collection.
  42. Genet, An American for Lafayette, p. 146.
  43. Lettre, date 15 juin 1916, James R. McConnell à Paul A. Rockwell. JRM Collection.
  44. Dolan, Oral Interview, p. 10. 
  45. Mason, Lafayette Escadrille, p. 128. 
  46. Flammer, The Vivid Air.
  47. Gros, A Brief History, p. 6.
  48. Les Carnets de Comptabilité en Campagne, Esc N° 124.  SHAA.
  49. Gordon, The Lafayette Flying Corps, p. 20.
  50. New York Herald.
  51. Bailey, The French Air Service War Chronology, p. 68.
  52. Gordon, Pilot Biographies, p. 45.
  53. Ibid., p. 45.
  54. Gordon, The Lafayette Flying Corps, p. 52.
  55. Ibid.
  56. Ibid., p. 53.
  57. Lettre, date 15 juin 1916, James R. McConnell à Paul A. Rockwell.  JRM Collection.
  58. Flying for France, vidéo, citation du neveu de Norman Prince.
  59. Gordon, Lafayette Flying Corps, p. 129.
  60. Lettre, date 12 juin 1960, Paul A. Rockwell à Phillip Hopkins.  NASMA.
  61. « L’Escadrille La Fayette, Tome II. » Icare, N° 160, P. 190.
  62. Tous les lettres écrit par M. Prince mentionné sont à Blérancourt.
  63. Gordon, Lafayette Flying Corps, p. 140.
  64. Lettre, date 8 mai 1929, William Thaw à Pittsburgh Post Gazette.  NASMA.
  65. Lettre, date 8 novembre 1959, Paul A. Rockwell à Charles Dolan.  Charles Dolan Collection, USAF Academy.
  66. Rockwell, American Fighters .
  67. Visite d’auteur.
  68. Gordon, Lafayette Flying Corps, p. 140, et Austen Crehore Collection, USAF Academy.
  69. Dossier Officiel d’Eugene Bullard, Blérancourt.
  70. Lettre, date 26 mars 1917, Edmond Genet à Eugene Bullard.  Blérancourt.
  71. Chicago Times et autres sources divers.
  72. Gordon, Lafayette Flying Corps, p. 7.
  73. Lettre, date 16 novembre 1917, Dr. Edmund Gros à Capitaine Hoffman.  Blérancourt.
  74. Lettre, date 4 novembre 1917, Dr. Edmund Gros à Eugene Bullard. Blérancourt.
  75. Lettre, date 17 mai 1929, Dr. Edmund Gros à Austen Crehore.  Blérancourt.
  76. Ibid.
  77. Lettre, date 27 décembre 1928, Eugene Bullard à Austen Crehore.  Blérancourt.
  78. Recommandation de Colonel Jan Girod, date janvier 1923.  Blérancourt.
  79. Chicago Times 23 mai 1923 et lettre de Lewis D. Crenshaw à Austen Crehore.  Austen Crehore Collection.
  80. Lettre, de Lewis D. Crenshaw à Austen Crehore.  Austen Crehore Collection.
Publié dans Uncategorized | Commentaires fermés sur Chapter Six. Dissension in the Ranks