saint venant 1940-------farm boulet

Tony, the lock keeper's cottage was not quite where the Taverne farm was, the actual distance as the crow flies is about 450 metres. See the photo below. The bridge would have been to the left of the lock, cutting off the bend in the road on both sides.

Attachment 2870

The lock was an obstacle, and tampering with it might have made it even more so. Remember that RWF and DLI were on the wrong side of the canal. Only the bridges were important. There was an old drawbridge, probably over the western lock gates or thereabouts, and the one built by the French engineers. Both lock gates would also have had a walkway, one metre wide at best and therefore barely passable.

The lock keeper's cottage was a landmark and gets the occasional mention. The lock could not be seen from a slit trench, so it doesn't.

To get an idea of the situation, use Google Street View and walk around the area.

John

Thanks, John, I was getting the lock keepers cottage and Taverne farm confused as well as picturing the whole scene upside down. I've got my thinking head back on now!

Tony

This may or not be relevant but I have read some of the Questionaires filled in by returning Prisoners of war and held at the National archives.One in particular refers to a 2nd DLI Private (Adamson)who was captured at St venant on the 27th May 1940 he states at the time of capture he was wounded,interrogated as to his Regiment and Division then treated for his wounds at Hospitale De,St Pol,France(Four week stay).The able bodied prisoners who were taken were marched off in the direction of Cambrai (RSM Goddards notes).
At the bottom of these questionaires is a request for information regarding War Crimes or violations of the Geneva convention.Anyone wishing to report these matters is asked to complete a seperate statement on a `Form Q`

Best

Jim

Interesting, Jim. St Pol and Merville both had a German field hospital and are places where we should look for Anthony. I'm hoping the Volksbund may have relevant records.

John

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]--> Good Afternoon
You know guy’s just when you think it’s safe to relax and await some replies, along comes an S.S. Officer, who collects broken down vehicles, and starts chucking spanners around, in the shape of Shot Down Tanks.
One got me somewhere between the eye’s, and has cost me some sleep.
Now, would you please correct me if i am wrong, but I was under the impression that RWF and 2DLI were infantry units, and I was not aware that they had tanks. it seems they had a couple of Bren gun carriers, which were leading when they were approaching St Floris on 23^rd and got taken out. But surely if they had tanks they would have been leading?
Like Tony it would appear that my thinking head had gone into stand by mode.
Something you said John didn’t register until our S.S Officer said that this was a Counter Attack to try and stop the German bridgehead around Robecq. I had read that a gap had appeared in the defensive line and I had assumed that RWF and 2DLI were going in to fill the gap.

I think we may have been taking a very short-sighted view of this situation. we seem to be only looking at it from the 23^rd and not what went on before.
What units were in this gap, and what happened to them, there is an odd reference to a M/G unit of 1^st Manchester’s, where did they come from. Were there still small fragments of the previous defenders still operating in the area. And did any of the previous defending units have tanks?
But all this raises another interesting point. We know that the St Venant area was within range of the German Arty on 25^th or 26^th when the HQ Co tried to withdraw to the north. But for how long previously had it been within range.
When we take into account the reference to a pontoon bridge in ‘’Escape to Victory’’ it makes a degree of sense. If your main escape route is liable to be taken out at any time then you need to consider your options. You would need to have an escape route outside the range of the arty. So the bridging stuff that was captured in St Floris? Could it have been British equipment recaptured by the RWF ?
How long had the British units been holding in this area before the German incursion? And what was their escape strategy, bearing in mind they were going to be pushed eastwards?
I think it might be useful to examine the situation before the RWF/2DLI arrived, and our shot down tanks, what type would they have been. Would they have weighed 15 tons, or less.
In the Majors Diary he states he saw RSM Goddard Directing traffic over the bridge. What traffic was this, was it all RWF/2DLI or were there elements of other units? I seem to recall that RWF/2DLI vehicles were sent north not long after they arrived and he says nothing about arty fire (because it was out of range).
What about the Diary’s of the other units, that were in place before the German attack?

It might also explain the disappearing engineers. If they had been attached to one of the original defense units, then if the remnant of their unit had retreated over the bridge would they not have gone with them?

While it may not seem to be too relevant to our quest I think it might be quite beneficial to know exactly what the situation was, that RWF/2DLI were getting into. As all we have are the two Regimental accounts which by their nature are bound to be restrictive.


ivor

A quick summary for your benefit, Ivor. I'm not going to rewrite the official history.

The SS officer mentioned "gepanzerte Fahrzeuge" which the unknown translator carelessly rendered as "tanks" - no doubt they were the two Bren carriers used in a last attempt to keep the Germans from establishing a bridgehead across the Lys (not Robecq, mind you, I never said that). Further up the road there was another carrier and a burning ammunition lorry belonging to the Manchesters.

Before the 22nd there had been French and British 2nd line units in and around St Venant, changing continuously. On the 22nd French troops began to form a defensive line around Bethune and along the Canal d´Aire from la Bassee to Aire, they were a mixed bag of a few infantry companies (including B Coy 2/5 West Yorks), some pioneers and two tank companies. South of St Venant this amounted to four tank platoons and four infantry platoons for four bridges. These were brushed aside by the Germans on the 24th and the survivors withdrew to Calonne-sur-la-Lys. Most of their tanks (the light Hotchkiss type) had been destroyed.

The 6th Bde (RWF, DLI, Berks) was sent to St Venant on the 24th in an attempt to re-establish the line along the Aire canal to protect the western side of the corridor to Dunkirk. Orders in similar situations (the Glosters at Cassel, for example) were simply to hold to the last man. Escape plans there were none. The Lys canal was the fall-back position. There was a modicum of support provided by Corps tps, the MG bn of the Manchesters, but this support amounted to nothing more than a few MG teams. If any of them escaped, their report would still not have made it into the WD.

The only artillery support in the area, once the French had pulled back, was 99th Field Regt (Bucks Yeo) at le Touquet.

John

I have tried over the past few days to try and source some eye witness accounts,no mean feat considering the years since the incident,however I may have found an account of someone who was evacuated to the HQ Barn and witnessed the events leading up to the capitulation there is of course the inevitable downside which I will come to later .In the Imperial War Museum is an oral testimony of Pte James Wray of the 2nd DLI,quite extensive but from the summary this part/summary may be of interest to our search;-

Quote:

---

....defensive positions at St Venant; Germans disguised as women; chickens shot and meal made; fire from German occupied copse and air activity; sniping activities of Lieutenant Peel; anti-tank gun brought up; advance of German troops; start of engagement; capture of maps; casualties; report sent back to Captain Cousins. becoming platoon commander; discussion of troop's performance in battle; proximity and nature of firing on Germans; reactions to fighting; creation of defences; opinion of Bren gun in action; weapons used by Germans and nature of attacks; treatment given to German soldier shot in knee; activities between attacks; wounding from mortar shrapnel; evacuation and treatment from Private Hurst; platoon casualties after wounding; state of Private Fisher; evacuation to Headquarters; action while resting in barn at Headquarters; orders to get away if could; crossing of canal. Aspects of hospitalisation treatment at Regimental Aid Post; journey to Dunkirk and opinion of battalion's chances; events in abandoned school; evacuation from school;

---

Pte James Wray,somehow,although wounded made it back from the HQ to England but once his wounds were healed he left the Regiment and served with the Gold Coast Regiment.He was interviewed by Peter Hart for The Imperial War Museum Catalogue number 12661.Now the downside the oral collections have been withdrawn and are not readily accesible online .The IWM site reads;-

Quote:

---

Access to Audio Recordings on Collections Search...Unfortunately we have to temporarily withhold online access to audio recordings so that some issues can be resolved. We anticipate being able to progressively restore access to the majority of digitised material.If you have an urgent need to gain access to this recording, please contact us.

---

I think everyone will agree that once reinstated this may prove very interesting.Also in this collection are more reports regarding the actions around St Venant including Sgt McLanes however this is the only account from HQ`s position.
Best
Jim

hi all.
I may have been quiet for a couple of days,i have been reading Major Ellis's account, which i find was written in 1954.john, i found the answer as to which unit was in the gap. it was a French unit. quoting from major Ellis.

'' Macforce, covered by the 1st Light Armoured Reconnaissance Brigade, arrived in teh area during the morning and formed a close perimeter defence of Cassel, while 137th Brigade headquarters took up positions between Hazebrouck and Morbecque.[11] In the Polforce sector between Thiennes and Robecq a French unit which had been holding the canal was withdrawn, leaving a gap in the defence which there were no troops to fill. Here elements of a German motorised division—the S.S. Verfügungs (or general service) Division—had crossed unopposed and had advanced to St Venant and the 2nd/5th West Yorkshire on the canal from Robecq to Hinges had moved companies back to Calonne and St Floris, to hold the flank of this enemy salient.''

This is the sort of info i was after, we now have another unit in the area at the relevant time, what have their diaries to say.
But another quote is also fascinating.

''For the most part the enemy remained comparatively quiet during the 25th on this front. German tanks in the neighbourhood of Aire penetrated at one time to within a few miles of Merville, but these were knocked out by artillery fire, and when the 2nd Division arrived, the 6th Brigade established our positions between Tannay and Robecq, turning the enemy out of St Venant and rebuilding the brigade there which had been destroyed.[29] Small bodies of German infantry managed to cross the canal on either side of Béthune, but there was no serious attack and by nightfall the defence of this front was considerably stronger. ''

Here we have another interesting piece of English.
''Rebuilding the Brigade there which had been destroyed ''
puzzle,, should this read Bridge? How, a pontoon bridge or an Auxiliary bridge.
But another point here. the 2nd Division was made up of 4th, 5th and 6th brigades together with a number of RA and RE units. do we have any info re the positions of the RE/RA?

I have also found another interesting piece of info in the following. the article is not directly concerned with our area but makes interesting reading.

http://home.scarlet.be/vdmeiren/The%...ay%201940.html

but i am going to quote one passage from it.

''The frontline was 110 km long, each division had to defend 10 km on the Lys river and 6km on the derivation canal. The new defense line was therefore too long and had several disadvantages First there was a shortage of equipment (few barbed wire, mines, telephone wires etc.). Secondly there was the Lys river itself, which was very shallow, had a lot of curbs and was mostly only 50cm deep (it had been unfortunately a very dry season). The riverbank on which the Belgians were located was lower than the riverbank on which Germans were approaching. This and the spring vegetation, which couldn’t be removed on time, enabled the Germans to approach the Belgian lines without being noticed. ''

I find the reference to the depth of the river very interesting. 20 ins. not really very deep. would this be a similar depth at St Venant.

Another interesting paragraph is the following.( i think it should be Major Ellis). I like the last line,in italics.

''Mayor Ellis, author of the Official History, wrote "there were no staff meetings between the BEF and the Belgian army". This is incomplete as the Belgians did pass all the information they had to the French and BEF but the BEF refused to have discrete consultations with the Belgian army. In The Official History you will also read that the Belgians were not prepared to exchange information about their military plans. Liddlel Hart writes about this the following: " This is a clear example of the difference between " official history" and real history". ''

This is what we have to sort out.

ivor

Mornin all.

It would seem that Major Ellis is the official historian for this phase of the war.But there are so many typo's in this, on line, version that i suspect it would be best if we could get hold of a copy of the original work.
It would also account for the reason why YDG seems to have quoted 'Verbatim' from Major Ellis with regard to the St Venant area.
Another interesting point. we are told that on 24th 2DLI were tasked with holding St Floris. did they takeover from 2nd/5th West Yorks.
There is also reference that the 'to the last man' defense of the Lys may not have been the case.

Ivor

Ivor, for the troops in the gap see my post #326 which already mentions 2/5 West Yorks. This Bn was part of 46 Div, sent to France as a labour force. It was withdrawn to Calonne and subsequently defended the bridge at Merville before being replaced by 6 KORR. I can detail the French units for you, but they are irrelevant to the fate of Anthony Corkhill.

Before spreading gunners and engineers around, please remember that 2 Div was given a section of more than 20 miles to cover. Normally this would have required 4 divisions. The only support for 6 Bde was the 99th Field Regt (Bucks Yeo).

The Lys in the sector we're interested in had been canalised and was certainly deeper than 20 in to allow traffic. East of Armentières there is no shipping on the river so 20 in would be quite plausible.

John

I have revisited a National Archives File WO 361/41 which deals with the missing DLI men from 1940.As I have previously stated Anthonys name (mis-spelled Corthill) has a line through it with `DEAD` alongside with the Reference `Q80`.Rather than speculate as to the meaning of `Q80` I have emailed the National Archives in London with the following enquiry;-

Quote:

---

I have recently being looking into the fate of `The Missing Men 1940` in particular The DLI (Catalogue Ref WO 361/41) Pg 605 gives a summary of the fate of these men but certain hand written references have me puzzled namely;- Q80 ,Q57 , UP-57 ,UP-47 and UP-16. Do you have any record as to what these `Q` and `UP` references refer to? It is important that I find out in particular what Reference Q80 refers to or contains.If these references are Files then they could hold the key to a 72 year search for information on a known 2 DLI casualty Pte Anthony Corkhill .Any help wor advice would be greatly appreciated.Thank You.

---

The `Q80` reference applies to two men only on the list;-

Pte A Corthill (Corkhill) Regimental number 4449147 no known grave Dunkirk Memorial

Pte W T Smith Regimental No 4449353 (William Thomas Smith son of George John and Ethel Smith; husband of Annie M. Smith, of Send, Surrey according to the CWGC died 15th May 1940 buried Section VII. Row B. Grave 18.Leopldsburg War Cemetery)

Of the other `Q` Reference `Q57` refers to Pte Harold Clarke Regimental number on roll 4442265 (This is a typo the correct number was 4442263) Harold died of wounds (Possibly received at St Venant on the 27th May ?)at Dunkirk and is buried in Dunkirk Town Cemetery Plot 2 Row 11 Grave 5.
4436524 Warrant Officer Class III Thomas Furby Mason (AA Platoon Hq Company) according to the `Townsend diary`died as a Prisoner of War.The CWGC lists him as dead between 10/05/1940 and 01/06/1940 buried at St Venant Cemetery Plot 4. Row C. Grave 59.

4445266 Pte James William Patton Son of John Robert and Isabella Patton; husband of Jessie Mary Patton, of Derby died of wounds
according to CWGC between 10/05/1940 and 04/06/1940 buried Leopoldsburg Cemetery Section VII. Row C. Grave 11.

The `UP` designation ,although not directly relevant to Anthony seems to refer to other 2 DLI who have either a date of death of between or known to have died of wounds (Two listed by the CWGC as 6th and 8th DLI not 2nd DLI???).
Hopefully we will find out soon what the `Q` reference definately is and if there are files associated to it.

Best

Jim

jim.
in your thread 323 you refer to 'Q' forms any connection ?

Very interesting indeed, Jim! If 'Q80' refers to a source, it must be traceable!

John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vori101

jim.
in your thread 323 you refer to 'Q' forms any connection ?

---

Hello Ivor,
Yes at the bottom of the questionaires for returning PoWs there is a section which asks if anyone has any knowledge of War Crimes if so they should complete Form `Q` I have always assumed that this `Q` reference was one and the same but I have now learnt not to `assume` anything hence my enquiry to the Archives.

Quote:

---

Very interesting indeed, Jim! If 'Q80' refers to a source, it must be traceable!

John

---

Yes John my thoughts exactly ..they are sure of Anthonys fate..will Q80 reveal why they are so sure?

Best
Jim

A reference to Forms 'Q':

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/c...ATID=13403&j=1

Doesn't sound very hopeful.

John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baconwallah

A reference to Forms 'Q':

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/c...ATID=13403&j=1

Doesn't sound very hopeful.

John

---

Hello John,
No it doesnt bode well if `Q80` does refer to a War Crime report but it will, if it is confirmed as such, give us a clear path to follow..that of a murder rather than a died of wounds? I will await there confirmation or otherwise ...these `Q` references must relate to something we can gain some sort of guidance from? I am busy going through the battalion casualty lists for that period to see if we can gain any leads...so many with no known graves..either `known to god` or else theres still a mass grave out there somewhere?

Oh while I remember one of those DLI who were classed as a `Missing Man` was last seen having been wounded through the leg being loaded onto a Manchester Regt truck...then nothing...no further trace..

Best

Jim

I have just sent an email to the head of the War Crimes Research and Documentation Centre of the University of Marburg, Germany, setting out the facts as we know them. Fingers crossed.

John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Verrieres

Oh while I remember one of those DLI who were classed as a `Missing Man` was last seen having been wounded through the leg being loaded onto a Manchester Regt truck...then nothing...no further trace..

---

If that was the burning ammunition lorry belonging to the Manchesters which was standing along the road to Haverskerque, which it may well have been, I don't think he survived long enough to be taken to a field hospital.

John

hi
i have been browsing back threads in research and found this from Oct 2010. it was started on 10,10, by Swiper and is entitled '' Two unknown RWF Soldiers - not quite.'' the quote below is from a post by ap1

''This is how GWGC describes the churchyard. "St. Floris is a village and commune 40 kilometres north-north- west of Arras and 10 kilometres north-north-west of Bethune. In the churchyard, east of the church and near the local war memorial, are the graves of 7 soldiers from the United Kingdom, 3 of them, whose graves could not be precisely located, are commemorated by special memorials, i.e., inscribed "Buried near this spot".''

interesting

ivor

That description would fit a lot of cemeteries across northern France and Belgium, from both world wars. What exactly is your point, Ivor?

Seven men of 1 RWF were killed at St Floris on the 23rd. There are seven graves, three of which are marked "Buried near this spot". The only mystery is why one of the seven would be in the CWGC records as having been killed on the 26th.

John

John.

the thread refers to two unknown RWF Soldiers. not three. so that would leave one 'unknown' unknown. so i was just wondering if these '' buried near this spot '' markers would have unit badges on them. and until we get a more definite location for Anthony then St Floris is just as likely a location as St Venant for his burial.

ivor

Ivor, the CWGC lists seven graves at St Floris, all seven named members of the RWF. That's all. Have a look at the CWGC site if you want to verify this.

John

Just back this evening and found this rather uninspiring answer to my enquiry regarding the `Q` reference

Quote:

---

Thank you for your email.<O:P></O:P>
<O:P></O:P>
I am afraid that the references in question are not listed within our records. The code letters/numbers were not recognised by any of our military specialists. <O:P></O:P>
<O:P></O:P>
Sorry for the disappointing reply. <O:P></O:P>
<O:P></O:P>
Yours sincerely<O:P></O:P>
<O:P></O:P>
Clive Hawkins<O:P></O:P>
<O:P></O:P>
Remote Enquiries Duty Officer<O:P></O:P>
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk <O:P></O:P>
<O:P> </O:P>

---

Well they are in their records because thats where I found them! Or do they mean the explaination/meaning is not recorded? I`ll consult someone else in due course.


Jim

Well, they could at least have referred you to their own explanatory web page (see my post 335 below). My link is broken, though - search for Series Reference WO 344.

It seems Forms 'Q' did indeed refer to witnessed war crimes. They would be kept with the relevant war crimes inquiry, not archived together in a separate 'Q' file. The question is, of course, with which war crimes file the form numbered Q80 can be found. It would be helpful if there was some sort of index, but that will be too much to hope for.

I find the knowledge of the NA military specialists to be somewhat less than I would have expected.

John

Hello ,
In regard to the IWM Oral Testimony of Pte James Wray which I posted a couple of weeks ago I have submitted an enquiry for access to reels 17 and 18 failing that a transcript of these Reels.Hopefully I will receive a reply very soon as to the feasibility of such a request.Will keep you all posted.
In regards to the `Q` reference I have contacted a Prisoner of War Expert who has had major dealings with the National Archives and their seeming reluctance to investigate the content of their own files.I`m not publishing their name as they have yet to respond and may prefer to remain annonomous again we will just have to wait and see
Best
Jim

Perhaps we should advise Tony to hire a researcher to go through the NA War Crimes files looking for Form Q 80.

John

I noticed today someone has taken an interest in the search for Anthony and members efforts on here.This was posted on the Sunderland Echo today 3rd Sept 2012.

Quote:

---

....Very interesting subject but is anyone else aware of a current search for a DLI soldier `lost` on May 27th 1940? Pte Anthony Corkhill `disappeared` on this date and despite extensive investigation by the Red Cross and his family he still remains `missing`.There is considerable local interest in this with the family searching for any DLI soldier who served at St Venant in France at this time.The familys search /story can be found here;-
http://rwf-forum.co.uk/vBulletin/sho...40-farm-boulet

I find it fascinating and best of luck lets help find Pte Corkhill he`s been away too long!

---

All publicity is good publicity???....In this case if it brings forward a witness it certainly will be!

Best

Jim

Sunderland Echo reader partickthistlenil certainly takes an interest in our efforts. Good for him/her. Let's hope someone remembers something.

John

Just to keep the `pot boiling` as my mother used to say heres part of the Report Sheet from an exumation at St Venant this particular example was found to be Pte Tom Rodgers of the 2nd DLI found after sterling work by his family.One curious factor came to light when the family had determined that the report did refer to Tom Rodgers the Grave into which Tom had been placed was according to the French GRAVE 154, however the Rodgers family received notification in 2002 from the MoD stating that all graves had been exhumed in 1948 for a full physical examination and according to British Records the soldier now in GRAVE 154 did not match the description given in the original French report.The Rodgers family asked the MoD `Where is the body which fits my brothers description?" and the answer came back "We do not know!"
To cut a long story short after the family had presented all their evidance the MoD conceded that Pte Rodgers had been one of the `Five innconu¬ originally buried in the Field of Paul Walle and that he was most likely near to GRAVE 154 now Row 3B but they would not accept he was in Grave 154 (Plot 21) but agreed on a stone bearing the inscription `BELIEVED TO BE BURIED IN THIS CEMETERY`.This I believe leads to the question..."Where are the British Records of 1948?"
Best
Jim

http://i488.photobucket.com/albums/r...dliinnconu.jpg

Good question, Jim! This is the first we have heard of a 1948 exhumation. Would the CWGC know more, I wonder?

John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baconwallah

Good question, Jim! This is the first we have heard of a 1948 exhumation. Would the CWGC know more, I wonder?

John

---

Hello john,
Indeed it is John it was only today when I re-read the Rodgers Book that I came across it.The records have to exist as they were used as a comparrison against those of M.Faivre.In relation to the CWGC George rodgers records ` were quite unresponsive and refusing even to give me (George Rodgers) a number to contact the Ministry of Defence" It seems,reading between the lines that these are MoD records.Something else of great interest is remembering at this time Tom Rodgers was `inconnu` yet the MoD checked his full record and found although he was an UNKNOWN his temp grave location was written on the records as situated between the War Memorial and the Town Centre (Which it wasnt as it proved) If you have a grave location then how could he have been classed as an unknown?
There is also reference to Dog-Tags the Rodgers got in touch with the German equivalent of the CWGC who were most helpful they suggested the tags may still have been held in the German MoD in Berlin.Enquiries were made with the Germans (again speedy reply) who stated all British records etc had been taken by the British in 1945 and were with...the MoD!
The Rodgers were being passed from pillar to post it seems so he contacted his local MP who managed to speed things along and although the book gives the MoD contact only as `Christopher`it does give an address of Trenchard Lines,Building 43 Upavon,Wiltshire an avenue for Tony to explore further perhaps certainly in regard to those 1948 Records??

Best

Jim

A letter to Tony's own MP might help. The MoD needs a lot of prodding and probably a firecracker up the ****. And keep your fingers crossed that they have not outsourced the archives.

John

Hello again all,

I'm hoping that the last couple of posts (by Jim and John) might signal a breakthrough or at least a decent development. I'll certainly go along with contacting my MP or writing to the MOD. It is always disappointing to realise that whenever the word 'Ministry' is in any title, you can expect any correspondence to be ignored or at least replies to be delayed by an unbelievable length of time. Evidence of this delaying tactic became obvious again when I was told that I would not receive Anthony's Service Records for up to nine to twelve months. It costs £30 for the privilege!

However, moaning does not get us anywhere and I'd just like to say that I will await further instructions as to when to contact the MP and MOD. I never say no to any guidance regarding matters of this kind, so please feel free to point me in the right direction.

Tony

Tony, are you in touch with the family of Tom Rodgers? I think they are the experts on extracting information from the MOD, with or without help of an MP. And if anyone can understand your predicament, they can. Certainly worth considering.

John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baconwallah

Tony, are you in touch with the family of Tom Rodgers? I think they are the experts on extracting information from the MOD, with or without help of an MP. And if anyone can understand your predicament, they can. Certainly worth considering.

John

---

John,

Strangely, I'm finding it rather difficult getting in touch with the Rodgers family. A while ago, I thought all I had to do was write to the Northern Echo, who played a part in the publicity of the 'Tom' case, but they wrote back saying that they had no contact details of the family. I have held back from a second attempt because I was contemplating sending an open email asking the readers to help. The trouble with this method is that once you publish your email address, you leave yourself open to all the possibilities of viruses and spam etc.

I'll have another go, all the same.

Tony

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by teecee1941

John,

Strangely, I'm finding it rather difficult getting in touch with the Rodgers family. A while ago, I thought all I had to do was write to the Northern Echo, who played a part in the publicity of the 'Tom' case, but they wrote back saying that they had no contact details of the family. I have held back from a second attempt because I was contemplating sending an open email asking the readers to help. The trouble with this method is that once you publish your email address, you leave yourself open to all the possibilities of viruses and spam etc.

I'll have another go, all the same.

Tony

---

Just to say that in the last few minutes I have contacted the Northern Echo with a request to post an appeal for the Rodgers family to get in touch with me or anyone to
provide their contact details.

Tony

Perhaps Jim has a way of contacting them?

Alternatively, have yourself interviewed by the Northern Echo, tell them about your quest and ask the Rodgers family to contact you via the Echo offices, or offer a temporary email address - Mailexpire.com will provide a free email address which expires automatically in three months, or just open a hotmail account, once it has done the job you never look at that inbox again.

John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baconwallah

Perhaps Jim has a way of contacting them?

Alternatively, have yourself interviewed by the Northern Echo, tell them about your quest and ask the Rodgers family to contact you via the Echo offices, or offer a temporary email address - Mailexpire.com will provide a free email address which expires automatically in three months, or just open a hotmail account, once it has done the job you never look at that inbox again.

John

---

Sorry I do not have Georges contact details I have a feeling they too may have set up a `ghost` account!
I do have some much better news regarding `Q` Forms despite the negative reply from the National Archives it does transpire that these `Q` Forms(or at least three full files of them!) still exist according to my author contact they can be found at ;-
WO 311/569 Extracts from Q (Questionnaire) Forms received from repatriated British POWs from Germany 1945 Apr - Sept
WO 311/570 Extracts from Q (Questionnaire) Forms received from repatriated British POWs from Germany 1945 Sept - Dec
WO 311/571 Extracts from Q (Questionnaire) Forms received from repatriated British POWs from Germany 1945 Dec - 1947 Jan

Sure enough they are listed I cut the reference from the National Archive Site Now which one contains `Q80`
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/c...TID=569000&j=1

Best Wishes

Jim

Good news indeed, Jim! And good work!

This calls for a researcher, unless some member of the Forum is a regular visitor to Kew with a healthy appetite for 72 year old mysteries.

John