Eisenhower meeting with Middleton - 9 Sep 44

[Tom from Cornwall]

I've just come across a reference to a meeting between Generals Eisenhower and Middleton of VIII Corps outside Brest on 9 Sep 44. Could anyone point me at any references that describe what the meeting was about?

I also understand that Eisenhower attended a parade at Paris on 8 Sep. Is that true? Could anyone help with information about his travel arrangements etc?

Many thanks in advance,

Tom

[phylo_roadking]

Tom...

http://www.amazon.co.uk/156C-Storch-Use ... B006K8LL40

...???

[phylo_roadking]

Tom...perhaps some question over the dates?

http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/61931383

Looks like he was in Paris on the 9th!

[Kingfish]

Just a hair over 300 miles from Brest to Paris.
Breakfast in Brest, dinner in Paris, those 5-star Supreme Allied commanders party like rock stars, I tell ya...

[Tom from Cornwall]

Kingfish,

Just a hair over 300 miles from Brest to Paris.
Breakfast in Brest, dinner in Paris, those 5-star Supreme Allied commanders party like rock stars, I tell ya...

I had always thought that he was laid up with a badly wrenched knee and therefore could not go forward to confer with his Army Group commanders over the best option for further advances towards Germany until 10 Sep when he met with Montgomery. Even then, I'm sure I've read that he asked to meet on his plane as his knee was not up to travelling anywhere by jeep/car.

Perhaps it was more the reception he expected to get, and the relatively spartan fare that Montgomery's HQ served up!

Now I can't find where in the 1,000 page pdf file the blooming signal was :roll: I'll keep looking...

Regards

Tom

[Tom from Cornwall]

Gents,

I knew I hadn't dreamt it

TO: HQ VIII CORPS PERSONAL FOR GENERAL MIDDLETON
FROM: SHAEF FORWARD FROM SMITH
REF NO: FWD 14266

General EISENHOWER will visit your headquarters about 1330 today, 9 September. He will land at the main airport at MORLAIX about 1230 and if you could have a staff car to pick him up rather than a jeep it would be appreciated.

9 Sept 44 1130B TOO: 091100B

So it seems it was fleshpots of Paris first, and then trip to see VIII Corps. Hmmm, the staff car thing does suggest still suffering from a leg injury though.

Regards,

Tom

[Kingfish]

I had always thought that he was laid up with a badly wrenched knee and therefore could not go forward to confer with his Army Group commanders over the best option for further advances towards Germany until 10 Sep when he met with Montgomery. Even then, I'm sure I've read that he asked to meet on his plane as his knee was not up to travelling anywhere by jeep/car.

Tom,

All kidding aside, I too would be interested in why they met. At first glance it seems odd that Ike would bother with a face to face while the 'great swan' was well underway. Also, VIII Corp was transferred from US 3rd to US 9th army at about this time. Whatever message Ike needed to tell Middleton could have been delivered by Simpson when the latter did his introductory front line tour.

[Aber]

Perhaps it was to meet Simpson, not Middleton, at the active headquarters in the area?

[Michael Kenny]

Perhaps it was to meet Simpson, not Middleton, at the active headquarters in the area?

You can ask the people at the Eisenhower Foundation ([email protected]) and they will send you copies of the relevant days in Eisenhower's desk Diary kept by Summersby.
I did it once and they sent me everything for free.

[Aber]

Alternatively, it may have been to meet ports & logistics staff as Eisenhower signalled Marshall on 9th Sept that Operation Chastity in Quiberon Bay was no longer needed

[Aber]

Even then, I'm sure I've read that he asked to meet on his plane as his knee was not up to travelling anywhere by jeep/car.

Perhaps it was more the reception he expected to get, and the relatively spartan fare that Montgomery's HQ served up!

Probably to avoid having a one to one meeting with Montgomery, as these generally did not go too well for Eisenhower.

SHAEF were IIRC expecting Montgomery to be pushing hard for a thrust to Berlin (based on a mis-reading of Montgomery's signals) and Eisenhower seems to have travelled 'lawyered-up' with Tedder and Gale to even the odds.

[Carl Schwamberger]

The meeting most likely concerned Middletons personal report on the siege of Brest & answers to some urgent question Ike had about when the port would be open.

I'm shooting from memory here, but there was a meeting that included Patton as well as Middleton which may have been the same date. There were many items on Eisenhowers agenda in the meetings that day (emphasize plural). Ike was very concerned over the port situation, what with his logistic people telling him the over beach supply was slowing significantly and the Mulberry docks could not be counted on through October. Cherbourg at that point was the only significant Channel/Atlantic port & Ike knew the Allies could not depend only on the Marsailles/Toulon super port group. Antwerp tho intact was shut off by the mines in the Scheldt & the German 15th Army covering them. The navy was telling Ike it could be a month clearing the channel to Antwerp, AFTER the Germans were removed. Brest had been a key port in the original Overlord logistics plans, & by the original expectations it was to have been in operation a month earlier. Ike went to get the direct opinions from Patton and Middleton as to exactly when the port might besecure so the salvage/repair units could start work. Once again I must say this meeting Including Patton may have been on the 9th September, or it may have been earlier in August.

In any case the three way meeting went poorly for Middleton. He was exhausted, brittle or defensive, had trouble with his answers, had a long list of problems with lack of heavy artillery & ammunition, shortage of assualt engineer units, infantry untrained for fortress siege/assualt, lack of fuel, rain, slow support from the navy... After Middleton departed Ike and Patton confered on about several subjects, one of which is if Middleton needed to be replaced. The question was left hanging. Not long afterwards Middletons corps was detached from the US 3rd Army to the 9th Army, which would have been Bradleys call, tho it was utterly logical given the curent mission of 3rd Army.

My main question here is if there were two meetings between Ike & Middleton, the first including Patton, & the second later on 9 September. A second meeting would have likely again concerned Middletons views on securing and repairing Brest.

Just maybe I still have the refrence I got this from several years ago.

[Kingfish]

Just curious, why wasn't there a serious attempt at capturing the other Bretan ports?

[Aber]

IIRC St Malo was captured, on the way to Brest.

The others L'Orient, St Nazaire and the proposed site for a further harbour to be developed at Quiberon Bay were ignored in September as they were too far from the frontline, Antwerp and Marsailles had been captured and it was expected that the Germans would wreck each port thoroughly. As noted above Eisenhower informed Marshall of this decision on 9 September.

It's unclear to me why they were not assaulted during the winter, as Ultra intercepts provided details on the actual strength of the garrisons and it should not have been too difficult to divert a US division or two. Presumably the Brest experience convinced the US that they would be difficult to capture, and not worth diverting forces which could be used in the front line.

[Tom from Cornwall]

Hi Carl,

Thanks for the suggestions about Ike's meeting with Middleton. I have seen elsewhere that by this date COMZ were basically saying they wanted to forget Brest and concentrate purely on ports north of the Seine, most especially Antwerp and were making policy based on assumptions that Antwerp would be rapidly opened to shipping. As you say, Ike may have wanted to discuss the progress of VIII Corps operations with Middleton purely from a logistics perspective [i.e. to validate the COMZ view] or, perhaps, may have wanted to know when the divisions of VIII Corps would be released for a more active role in support of either Patton or Hodges. The other alternative is, as you also suggest, that it was more of a liaison visit to discuss 9th Army taking command of VIII Corps and making sure that the two HQs (9th Army and VIII Corps) were properly co-ordinated.

I guess his other purpose may have been to clarify in his own mind (before meeting Montgomery) the importance that the early opening of Antwerp would have for the logistics support to the Allies, and especially for 12th US Army Group, as they moved towards the German frontier.

It would be great if you were able to find the reference from which your recollections were made; I will also try a few likely sources that may talk about this including d'Este's biography of Patton, MacDonald's Siegfried Line and Weighley's 'Eisenhower's lieutenants'.

Many thanks to all for their other contributions; all valuable food for thought and very welcome.

Regards

Tom