StatementJourney from Dunkirk to AntwerpSub Lieutenant Shane Chichester began his statement by describing his journey from Dunkirk to Antwerp, undertaken under difficult conditions and marked by slow progress and uncertainty. He travelled using Commodore Henderson’s car, encountering delays caused by congestion, military traffic, and general confusion on the roads as forces moved toward and away from the threatened city. During this journey he passed through various headquarters and reported encounters at General Rawlinson’s Headquarters, where the atmosphere reflected the deteriorating situation. He also met Colonel Ponsonby and other officers, receiving fragmentary information but little in the way of clear direction. His movements during this period were largely dictated by circumstance rather than by structured orders, and he was required to move repeatedly between locations as the situation evolved. Sub Lieutenant Chichester’s account conveys a sense of uncertainty and constant movement, with progress slowed by traffic and by the need to navigate a command environment in which authority and responsibility were not always clearly defined. Encounter with Lieutenant-Colonel Bridges and the Loss of the Car Sub Lieutenant Chichester described how Lieutenant-Colonel Bridges came to his room at the hotel in Antwerp and demanded the use of his car. Sub Lieutenant Chichester protested, explaining that he required the vehicle in order to carry out his orders, which included reporting to Commodore Henderson. Despite this, Bridges insisted on taking the car. Crucially, Sub Lieutenant Chichester stated that Bridges represented himself as being the Chief of the Staff in order to obtain the vehicle. Sub Lieutenant Chichester accepted this assertion at the time. After taking the car, Bridges used it to arrange bolt heads, met Major Richardson, and later returned to the hotel, where he had breakfast. Sub Lieutenant Chichester was then taken toward the trenches and instructed to remain in the area until he heard further from Bridges. Waiting, Delay, and Continued Uncertainty Sub Lieutenant Chichester stated that he waited until approximately 11.30 p.m. without receiving any further instructions from Bridges. Growing increasingly concerned, Sub Lieutenant Chichester eventually transported Major Richardson to Zwyndrecht, during which journey he again encountered Bridges. No clear explanation or instruction was given to Sub Lieutenant Chichester regarding Commodore Henderson or the situation of the 1st Brigade. Aftermath and Movement West In the remainder of his statement, Sub Lieutenant Chichester described remaining in the area in the hope of locating staff officers from the 1st Brigade. Sub Lieutenant Chichester continued to carry Bridges on further journeys, despite his growing unease about the lack of information reaching Commodore Henderson. Eventually, with no further instructions forthcoming, Sub Lieutenant Chichester made his way toward Bruges. His statement makes clear that at no point did he receive confirmation that Commodore Henderson had been informed of the withdrawal order, nor that the situation of the 1st Brigade had been properly addressed. TestimonyUnder questioning, Sub Lieutenant Chichester was asked directly whether Lieutenant-Colonel Bridges had told him he was Chief of the Staff when demanding the car. Sub Lieutenant Chichester replied that he had a very distinct impression in his mind that this was what Bridges told him.Sub Lieutenant Chichester was further questioned as to whether he had remonstrated with Bridges about his inability to fulfil his orders regarding Commodore Henderson. Sub Lieutenant Chichester stated that he had done so, and that Bridges had replied that it was all right, that he was going straight down to the trenches, and that he would see the Commodore and put matters right. Sub Lieutenant Chichester was then asked what his own intentions would have been had he not been stopped by Bridges. Sub Lieutenant Chichester replied that he intended to set out at daylight to find Commodore Henderson, and that he believed there was some hope of success in doing so. He explained, however, that he was not permitted to telephone, Captain Smith at Headquarters having refused to allow him to communicate. Instead, he was told to join a convoy arranged to leave Antwerp at seven o’clock in the morning, its destination being Commodore Henderson’s Headquarters. Further questioning addressed Sub Lieutenant Chichester’s concerns regarding the situation of the 1st Brigade. Sub Lieutenant Chichester stated that he had expressed these concerns to Bridges. He also referred to a conversation with Major Richardson, who later remarked that he believed himself to have been the last Englishman to cross the bridge. Taken together, this evidence suggests that doubts about the whereabouts and fate of the 1st Brigade were known to Bridges at the time, yet no corrective action followed. Assessment of the EvidenceSub Lieutenant Chichester’s testimony is notable for its clarity, consistency, and lack of self-interest. As a junior officer with no authority over events, his evidence is confined to what he personally saw, heard, and attempted to do. This gives his account particular weight in establishing what information was available to senior officers and when.His evidence places Lieutenant-Colonel Bridges at several critical junctures: taking control of transport under false pretences, preventing Sub Lieutenant Chichester from carrying out his instructions to report to Commodore Henderson, and assuring him that the matter would be dealt with personally. Sub Lieutenant Chichester’s repeated concern for the situation of the 1st Brigade, and the absence of any subsequent action in response, are central features of his testimony. Importantly, Sub Lieutenant Chichester does not speculate on motives or intent. He simply records that concerns were raised, promises were made, and no effective communication resulted. His evidence therefore strengthens the impression that the failure to inform Commodore Henderson was not the result of ignorance, but of a breakdown — or neglect — in the execution of responsibilities at staff level | ||||
|
|
|
|
©2015- RoyalNavalDivision.info |