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

**Verrieres** · 26-07-2012, 22:00

Ivor,
Perhaps I can help with some of your questions.In regard to Captain Townsend`s diary please remember this must have been written in England after the event the inclusion of POW Numbers issued by the Germans in his end reference,and details of Gallantry awards not yet authorised whilst in France demonstrate this.

The Tank on the bridge was one of FIVE approaching the bridge not including the one which had bulldozed through the DLI Hq (Barn).The diary refers to Armoured Cars until the later paragraphs.

The Special relationship between RSM Goddard and Pte Corkhill? The pair had served together since 1931 (apart from a short posting by the RSM to 1st DLI).RSM Goddard had served throughout the 1st WW again with 2 DLI.

The area of the Robecq Rd Rue Amuzoires and St Floris was held by Machine gun detachments from C Company 2nd Manchesters.

Military Hospitals included those at Laventie,Merville and Saint Pol (Four DLI died at Merville and are buried there two were known to be from Hq Company)

The Pay issue the only thing that can be drawn from this is there must have been great confusion with men spread out over a wide area.The only men recorded in any number as drawing their pay were those of D Company.How accurate these records are is also open to interpretation as many returning PoWs questioned the validity of these records.

On another unrelated (not quite true!) The owner of the Farm used by the DLI as their Hq,Monsieur Taverne was found dead in (possibly executed by Germans) in a canal lock at Merville.

Best

Jim

teecee1941 · 26-07-2012, 22:47

Originally Posted by vori101

teecee
my question in the above is just a general interest question. if there is nothing obvious then i dont think there is any need to dig further.

ivor

Ivor.

No, I am not aware of any connection between the families.

Tony

teecee1941 · 26-07-2012, 23:00

Originally Posted by vori101

teecee
my question in the above is just a general interest question. if there is nothing obvious then i dont think there is any need to dig further.

ivor

teecee1941 · 26-07-2012, 23:09

Originally Posted by teecee1941

Ivor.

No, I am not aware of any connection between the families.
On a human interest note;- I have a copy of a letter that RSM Goddard wrote to Anthony's father (my grandfather) after the war. He expressed his sorrow at the realisation that Anthony had not been seen again after the 27th. He said, ''I was very attached to him, he was a first class lad''.

Tony

**ivor43** · 28-07-2012, 00:33

Hi Guys.

What follows is lengthy (3 parts) and not intended as a lecture or a criticism of anyone or any published work. Neither is it my Intention to be insulting or offensive. My only wish is to try and promote some Creative Thinking. Which I believe is going to be needed to solve this. Remember evidence is used to prove or disprove something.

I am beginning to have some misgivings about what we seem to be doing here. As a Police Officer we operated under very strict rules, The Judges Rules covered the treatment of Offenders, including the Formal Caution, ‘’ You are not obliged etc’’ as it was then. The Rules of Evidence , which laid down what was and was not permitted. Hearsay evidence was not permitted. Circumstantial Evidence was allowed but may lead to questions. But the Best Evidence was that of Eye Witnesses. However, this may to a surprising degree differ. If for example I witnessed a RTA. From a point say 100 yds to the rear, and someone else saw the same incident from the opposite direction they could have seen something entirely different. Yet in Court we would both be telling the Truth, As We Saw it. That is why in an earlier post I said the Truth was not always what it seems.
The training we had in Investigative technique was very comprehensive. In order to take a case to Court you had to examine Every Piece of Evidence. Even if it was contrary to the case. Because you needed to be aware, if possible, of what the Defendant was going to use.

In this case, the people who will have the final decision regarding our findings are going to have a lot more experience in these matters than we have, and believe me will go through our findings in minute detail. Therefore we have to be absolutely 100% sure of our facts. with the evidence to back it up.
What we have done so far has generated a large amount of info, but has it really moved us any closer to out goal. Not really. Why?
There seem so be a reluctance to challenge the Regimental accounts, although we, I thought, were broadly in agreement that they could be suspect.
Verriers, you say that the Majors account should not be trusted as it was probably written when he returned to England, which may have been a matter of Days later. But you seem to accept the 2 DLI account which, after the original was lost, was rewritten sometime later. The same, I believe, applies to the Red Dragon, it was written later based on reports made some time after the action. I am sorry guys but we need to find some fresh evidence. I know that this is difficult 72 years after the event, but we have to try.
My questioning the Aid Post has resulted in john finding a long forgotten book, Sorry about the dust. But this may lead to something else we do not yet know. This may be fresh Independent Evidence.
The behaviour of RSM Goddard, in relation to Anthony’s Dog Tags, is odd, hence my question about family ties. Has it any relevance? I don’t really know, maybe not. But we should not totally dismiss it.

1

**ivor43** · 28-07-2012, 02:03

Now my ‘Fanciful’ account of German Engineers having a night out in Haverskirque.
The RWF War Diary says that in the morning a party of German Engineers were seen heading from the direction of Haverskirque. The plan was to capture them but they were engaged before this could happen.

So why were these engineers heading towards St Venant/St Floris? Again evidence shows that Bridging material was captured at St Floris. So it is not that difficult to connect the two. The engineers were returning to continue with what they had been doing the previous day. The troops encountered by the advancing RWF would have been guarding the Bridging Equipment. So presuming that these engineers were not aware that British troops were nearer than was expected, why would they not go into the nearest town.

If any of you were out on Manoeuvres close to a town, with a free night, did you stay in camp?
Now for my crowning piece of Questionable Logic. My second bridge to the East of St Venant and associated Tank Tracks. The following quote is taken from :-

The War in France and Flanders 1939-1940 by Major L.F.Ellis
No one visiting the quiet little town of St Venant for the first time would consider that it had military importance. Yet the contrast between its past and the peaceful history of any comparable town in England could hardly be greater. St Venant has seen many actions and suffered many sieges. Sir Thomas Morgan, one of Cromwell's commanders, took it from the Spaniards in 1657; Marlborough took it from the French in 1710; in 1940 it had been taken by the Germans on May the 24th and recaptured by the British 2nd Division on May the 25th (page 146). It was held on the morning of the 27th by the 6th Brigade's right flank battalion, the 1st Royal Welch Fusiliers, and part of the 2nd Durham Light Infantry. It will be remembered that the Welch Fusiliers had a detached company holding Robecq, but between St Venant and Robecq the enemy had penetrated. On the morning of the 27th composite forces of tanks and infantry attacked both places. The troops holding St Venant had heavy casualties and were gradually borne back and enclosed. **As evening drew on, the enemy had tanks beyond the canal bridge behind St Venant. When at last the order to withdraw north of the Lys reached the reduced garrison they had to fight their way out and but a fraction of the battalions got through. The detached company of Welch Fusiliers holding Robecq, which had been isolated and completely surrounded the day before, also tried to fight its way back to the Lys, but few avoided capture.
Through the gap east of St Venant the enemy's armoured columns had advanced on Merville and Lesterm. Merville was practically surrounded. A machine-gun company of the 6th Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders sent to assist the 6th King's Own came under heavy fire as they approached, and could not get into the town. The enemy was reinforced by troops landed by aircraft on the nearby airfield (which our gunners shelled) but the garrison held out till night-time when, on orders to withdraw, those who were left managed very skilfully to get away. The third battalion of the 6th Brigade—the 1st Royal Berkshire—also suffered heavily before they too were drawn back to the north.[14]

2

**ivor43** · 28-07-2012, 02:05

Interesting.
In the first Para I have Starred an interesting passage re tanks behind St Venant while British troops were still in St Venant. Did they still hold the bridge if so where did these tanks come from. We are not told. They may have come across from the west. This may also be taken as circumstantial evidence for a crossing to the east. This is the sort of event that needs to be investigated, as if there is no evidence of an incursion from the west then they must have come from the East.
Oh dear there is a gap east of St Venant.
We have captured Bridging material at St Floris. We have a party of Engineers heading for the area. We have some very suspicious field marks just across the Lys. All to the East of St Venant.
Whilst this is very much Circumstantial Evidence it gives a very strong argument for the possibility of a crossing. Taken together with the Majors Diary and the fact that A Co RWF and was it D Co 2DLI were defending the East of St Floris (were they defending something other than St Floris?). then it increases the possibility. I have no direct evidence, yet, but I am still looking.
Hmm.
I read of the above several weeks ago and did not realise the relevance, it took me an hour to find this again this AM .
I hope this has not been boring or too fanciful. I just wish to try and create some fresh ideas. And encourage some ‘off the cuff’ thinking.
We can Not ignore anything even if it does not fit with historical records. Mon Amis, the answer will not be found in the Authorised Versions of the Regimental records.

Ivor

**Verrieres** · 28-07-2012, 03:09

Originally Posted by vori101

Hi Guys.

What follows is lengthy (3 parts) and not intended as a lecture or a criticism of anyone or any published work. Neither is it my Intention to be insulting or offensive. My only wish is to try and promote some Creative Thinking. Which I believe is going to be needed to solve this. Remember evidence is used to prove or disprove something.

I am beginning to have some misgivings about what we seem to be doing here. As a Police Officer we operated under very strict rules, The Judges Rules covered the treatment of Offenders, including the Formal Caution, ‘’ You are not obliged etc’’ as it was then. The Rules of Evidence , which laid down what was and was not permitted. Hearsay evidence was not permitted. Circumstantial Evidence was allowed but may lead to questions. But the Best Evidence was that of Eye Witnesses. However, this may to a surprising degree differ. If for example I witnessed a RTA. From a point say 100 yds to the rear, and someone else saw the same incident from the opposite direction they could have seen something entirely different. Yet in Court we would both be telling the Truth, As We Saw it. That is why in an earlier post I said the Truth was not always what it seems.
The training we had in Investigative technique was very comprehensive. In order to take a case to Court you had to examine Every Piece of Evidence. Even if it was contrary to the case. Because you needed to be aware, if possible, of what the Defendant was going to use.

In this case, the people who will have the final decision regarding our findings are going to have a lot more experience in these matters than we have, and believe me will go through our findings in minute detail. Therefore we have to be absolutely 100% sure of our facts. with the evidence to back it up.
What we have done so far has generated a large amount of info, but has it really moved us any closer to out goal. Not really. Why?
There seem so be a reluctance to challenge the Regimental accounts, although we, I thought, were broadly in agreement that they could be suspect.
Verriers, you say that the Majors account should not be trusted as it was probably written when he returned to England, which may have been a matter of Days later. But you seem to accept the 2 DLI account which, after the original was lost, was rewritten sometime later. The same, I believe, applies to the Red Dragon, it was written later based on reports made some time after the action. I am sorry guys but we need to find some fresh evidence. I know that this is difficult 72 years after the event, but we have to try.
My questioning the Aid Post has resulted in john finding a long forgotten book, Sorry about the dust. But this may lead to something else we do not yet know. This may be fresh Independent Evidence.
The behaviour of RSM Goddard, in relation to Anthony’s Dog Tags, is odd, hence my question about family ties. Has it any relevance? I don’t really know, maybe not. But we should not totally dismiss it.

1

Ivor
Sorry but I never said that Townsends Diary was not to be trusted nor have I ever said I accepted the official 2 DLI diaries,if you recall it was me who pointed out that the `official diaries were reconstituted at a latter date,Townsends diary and the Official Diaries are just that `Diaries` not legal statements.I think your leading the witness..there!
Townsends diaries could indeed have been written days after ...but they were not!..The clues are in the diary itself .As an ex-Policeman like you said your investigative training was quite intensive so you would have course noticed the most damming evidence of all The Diary of Major CM Townsend..not Captain CM Townsend as he was in 1940.Promotion to Major came officially in August 1945 before this he was war substansive.
I have listed why RSM Goddard may have had such a special relationship with Anthony... due to his long service ,I`ve posted the locations of Hospitals etc all of which were legitimate questions posted in this thread what I do not and will not do is cast any doubt on any document official or semi-official.What I do is accept both accounts as you so rightly put it as AS WE SAW IT.

Best
Jim

**jungle1810** · 28-07-2012, 11:16

Hello,
Re the mention opf armoured cars in the ST Venant area, I came across the following. Sd Kfz 234 Started building in 1940 in response to a German army requirement. Country of origin Germany crew 4 men weight 11,740 Kg 25,828 LB, Length 6.80 metres Width 2.3 metres, height 2.38 metres Armour 5.15 mm 0. 19.05 of an inch. armaments one 20 mm kwk 30/50 mm cannon one coaxial 7.92 mm machine gun power plant one Tatra model 103 diesel engine developing 210 hp, maximum road speed 85 km/h 53 miles per hour fording 1.2 metres 3foot 10.75 inches vertical obstacle o.5 metres 1 foot 7.75 inches trench 1.35 metres 4 foot 5 inches. This is an 8 wheeled vehicle ( not a tracked vehicle)
Regards RBD

**jungle1810** · 28-07-2012, 11:35

Hello,
Another version of a light armoured c ar built for the German army in the mid 1930's. SdKfz 222 Country of origin Germany Crew 3, Weight 4,800 kg 10,560 lb, Dimensions length 4.80 metres 14 foot 8 inches, width 1.95 metres 6 foot 4.75 inches, height 2 metres 6 fot 6.75 inches, with grenade screen Range 300 km 187 milesw armour 14.5 -30 mm 0.6 -1.2 inches armaments one 20 mm KwK 30 cannon, one 7.92 m G 34 machine gun power plant one Horch / Auto -Union V8 -108 water cooled petrol engine developing 81 hp maximum road speed 80 k/m 50 miles per hour fording 0.6 24 inches. this is a four wheeled vehicle
Regards RBD aka jungle1810