British Wreck Commissioner's Inquiry
Day 17
Testimony of Joseph B. Ismay, cont.
The Commissioner:
"Probable" appears to me to mean that of 20 times you may expect to meet it, at all events, 11 times. The odd thing about it is that these paragraphs I have been reading are headed with a reference to the particular chart which I have been looking at all through.
Sir Robert Finlay:
The copy I have purports to have corrections up to 1911.
The Commissioner:
Yes.
The Attorney-General:
What is that?
Sir Robert Finlay:
The route chart - large corrections up to January, 1908, small corrections up to 1911.
The Commissioner:
Have you had this book "Sailing Directions" before you, Mr. Attorney?
The Attorney-General:
No, it is the first time our attention has been directed to it.
The Commissioner:
The paragraph I have been reading, and the pages on this subject, are all intended to explain the chart because they are headed all along, "Chart 2058, North Atlantic Route Chart." So that it is extremely desirable to read the chart with the book. My attention is drawn to this passage at page 17.
The Attorney-General:
Is that the Nova Scotia one?
The Commissioner:
The paragraph is the same in both: "It is impossible to give within the outer limits named any distinct idea where ice may be expected, and no Rule can be laid down to ensure safe navigation, as its position and the quantity met with differ so greatly in different seasons. Everything must depend upon the vigilance, caution and skill with which a vessel is navigated when crossing the dangerous ice -bearing region of the Atlantic Ocean."
The Attorney-General:
I am very much obliged to your Lordship for calling our attention to it.
Sir Robert Finlay:
Your Lordship will recollect what Captain Moore, the Captain of the "Mount Temple," said at page 197, Question 9388, "Was the ice further south than you had known it?
- (A.) I never knew it to be so far south before. Not in my whole experience of 27 years, I never knew it so far south. (Q.) And you are constantly running backwards and forwards?
- (A.) For 27 years."
The Commissioner:
I am told these books are based on an experience of over 100 years, but, at all events, the experience of a lifetime. What one may call a lifetime has not shown that ice is found ordinarily or probably in these regions.
The Attorney-General:
Field ice.
The Commissioner:
I am talking of field ice.
Sir Robert Finlay:
And icebergs not frequently.
The Commissioner:
And evidently the Attorney-General did not realise when he was opening the case, and has not since realised, that there is any reason to expect ice in the sense that it is usually found there.
The Attorney-General:
No. The case that I have made and that I have been putting before your Lordship in regard to it up to the present has been that information was given of this apparently very extraordinary occurrence of field ice being encountered on this particular track.
The Commissioner:
That is the "Baltic" telegram.
The Attorney-General:
That is the "Baltic" telegram, and therefore the view I suggested was that it involved an obligation upon those responsible for the navigation of the ship, to take extreme care when they got that report.
The Commissioner:
Of course; whatever the information of the chart may be, the information of the telegram was most specific, and referred not only to icebergs, but to field ice.
The Attorney-General:
That is the point. Your Lordship is quite right. I have not made the case that the Commander ought to have taken the precaution to discover field ice without having received any report from any other vessel. I did not suggest that. In point of fact I did not go into it, and according to the evidence that was then before me, I did not think that he would expect to encounter it. Now that I see the book, of course it may be another question; but I am upon the telegram, which seems to me to place it so much higher.
The Commissioner:
Oh, of course it does; I only want to have it cleared up, because I was quite startled when I was told that there was no occasion for a telegram, because you most probably expect ice there. That startled me, and with all respect to this book, as I understand it at present, it seems to me to be quite inconsistent with the fact that the numbers of steamship companies' liners crossing have agreed to follow this route.
The Attorney-General:
As I understand, what the book says that may be so, but at the same time you may encounter field ice in this track, and therefore must be very careful.
The Commissioner:
It does not say that; it says: "You probably will."
The Attorney-General:
I suppose it is a matter of extreme precaution; that emphasises it. I read the paragraph rather hastily, I admit, but it seems to me devised for the purpose of impressing on navigators the necessity for extreme caution when they are in these parts at this time of the year. It is not meant to do more than that, but it does that.
The Commissioner:
Well, but it says something which is not in accordance with the evidence.
The Attorney-General:
Yes, it says that with the object of impressing the necessity for caution.
The Commissioner:
It is equivalent to crying "Wolf."
The Attorney-General:
I do not know. I will not say that.
The Commissioner:
That is what you mean now, you know. In order to induce people to be extra careful they put in what is not there.
The Attorney-General:
No, I am not saying that; that is not my suggestion of it. I hear of the book, of course, for the first time for the reason I have indicated, that our case has been put on the wireless telegraphy reports, which seemed to place it beyond this category, as your Lordship agrees. But when we do examine into it and have that brought before us, in view of the fact that your Lordship is asked to answer some questions about tracks in the Enquiry, it does become of importance, and, speaking for myself, I am very much obliged to those who have called our attention to the fact that attention should be specifically directed to this point.
The Commissioner:
Quite right.
The Attorney-General:
Because, although it may not have happened for 25 years, it has happened this year, and it may happen again in another year.
The Commissioner:
My attention is drawn to the fact, and no doubt it is a fact, that the chart is based upon the book, but if the chart is based upon the book, then I do not know why the line of field ice is not South of the track.
The Attorney-General:
I find in the meteorological Charts they speak of it as a mean limit.
The Commissioner:
A mean?
The Attorney-General:
Yes.
The Commissioner:
That may explain it, possibly.
The Attorney-General:
I had not seen the meteorological Charts till this question arose, but when I look at them I see that there.
The Commissioner:
I thought it meant the usual limit.
Sir Robert Finlay:
Beyond all question that is the meaning of the legend upon this route chart, because it says "Icebergs have been seen within this line."
The Commissioner:
Yes, I was thinking rather of pack ice.
Sir Robert Finlay:
And then "Field ice between March and July" is the legend round the etched line.
The Attorney-General:
If your Lordship would look at Question 8 you would see why I think it all important now that we should direct some attention, at a later stage, of course, to it.
The Commissioner:
"What was, in fact, the track taken by the 'Titanic' in crossing the Atlantic Ocean? Did she keep to the track usually followed by liners on voyages from the United Kingdom to New York in the month of April? Are such tracks safe tracks at that time of year? Had the master any, and, if so, what, discretion as regards the track to be taken?"
The Attorney-General:
Yes.
The Commissioner:
Have you the sailing directions?
19027. (The Attorney-General.) Yes. (To the witness.) Now, Mr. Ismay, according to what you have told us and what we have heard during the course of this Enquiry as to encountering field ice, had you been told during the course of this voyage that you would encounter field ice within 24 hours, that would have shown the necessity for extreme caution?
- Certainly.
19028. And you know, do you not, from what you have told us that when Captain Smith handed you the marconigram just about lunchtime, as you say, which had been received from the "Baltic," that did indicate quantities of field ice in the track along which you were travelling?
- About on the track, I think.
19029. So that you see the result of that would be that information was given by this wireless telegram that you would certainly within less than 24 hours be encountering field ice if you pursued the same course?
- I believe that is so.
19030. So far as you were concerned, did it strike you as a serious thing that you would encounter field ice?
- No, I do not think it did.
19031 I do not quite understand why not. That is what puzzles me. According to your view the encountering of field ice was a very serious matter?
- The only thing for the Commander to do would be to take steps to avoid the field ice.
19032. I agree?
- Therefore, it did not concern me.
19033. You thought that your Commander would take steps to avoid it?
- Certainly.
19034. And to keep off that track?
- I thought he would take steps to avoid it.
19035. And to keep off that track along which he would meet it?
- If he thought it necessary to do so.
19036. But if he thought he would meet field ice along that track would you expect him to take steps to avoid meeting it?
- Certainly.
The Commissioner:
In fact, this steamer never did encounter field ice.
The Attorney-General:
Which steamer?
The Commissioner:
The "Titanic."
The Attorney-General:
No, but she had the report.
The Commissioner:
Oh, she had the report, but in fact, she never encountered any; she encountered an iceberg.
The Attorney-General:
Yes, she came into collision with an iceberg.
The Commissioner:
As far as I know, she never encountered field ice.
The Attorney-General:
No, but the evidence is there were a good many icebergs seen in the morning; so that apparently they were coming across the track.
The Commissioner:
That is something quite different from field ice.
The Attorney-General:
I do not wish to argue it now, but your Lordship sees that there is a report of it, and a question of what he should do. Whether he encountered it or not is of importance later on. I quite appreciate what your Lordship means. The only evidence of field ice is from the "Californian," I think.
The Commissioner:
And the "Mount Temple."
The Attorney-General:
Yes.
The Commissioner:
And I am told the "Mesaba" too.
The Attorney-General:
Yes, that is wireless - I was not thinking so much about that. There is a little difficulty about the "Mesaba." We are not relying upon it so far, because we have not proved it satisfactorily.
The Commissioner:
At present my view is that the "Mesaba's" message never reached them at all.
19037. (The Attorney-General.) We are not referring to it for that reason. (To the witness.) The only thing I want to ask you about this is: When you realised that this was a serious matter - that you would be, according to this telegram, encountering field ice within less than 24 hours, did you say nothing to the Captain at all about it?
- I did not.
19038. Not ask him whether he was going to change his course?
- No.
19039. Nor he to you?
- No.
The Commissioner:
Will you tell me what the danger would be with a vessel of this size going at this speed if she encountered field ice as distinct from an iceberg? Would there be any serious danger?
The Attorney-General:
I should have thought so.
The Commissioner:
I do not know. I am asking because I should think when you approach field ice it is probably not so compact as it is in the middle of it. You see what I mean?
The Attorney-General:
Yes, you may have loose places before you get into the field.
The Commissioner:
Yes, I doubt whether there is anything like the danger in running into the edge of field ice which there is in running up against an iceberg.
19040. (The Attorney-General.) Well, My Lord, there are those with your Lordship who can answer that better than I can. I should have thought it was a very serious matter. There are various dangers which occur when a ship once gets amongst ice, all round it, even though it does not happen to be compact. (To the witness.) When the "Baltic" telegram was brought to you and handed to you by the Captain, it follows from what you have already told us, Mr. Ismay, that nothing was said; in point of fact, there were passengers to whom you were talking when the Captain passed, were there not?
- Yes.
19041. So that unless he meant to convey to passengers the information that was in that telegram, in the ordinary course he would hand it to you for you to read for yourself and not to say anything about it?
- Yes.
19042. That would explain, no doubt, why he said nothing when he handed the telegram. But what I am asking you about now is later than that, some hours later; I think you told us something like 7 or a quarter-past, when you were in the smoking room he asked you for the telegram which had been in your pocket all the time?
- He did.
19043. As I follow you, you had not had any conversation with him between those times or at that time?
- No.
19044. You simply handed him back the telegram?
- That is all.
19045. If I understand rightly what you have said this morning, leaving it to him to take such precautions as he thought right as the person responsible for the navigation of the ship?
- Absolutely.
19046. You thought that he would take precautions?
- Naturally.
19047. But what they were you left to him?
- Absolutely.
19048. There is just one question I wanted to ask you about the speed. Was the "Titanic" built to go about the same speed as the "Olympic"?
- About the same, perhaps a little bit better.
19049. A little bit better than the maximum of the "Olympic"?
- That is what was expected.
19050. I asked you some questions about this, and you were not able to give me definite information as to what the maximum speed was that you thought you would get from the "Titanic"?
- No, I could not say.
19051. But I see that you were able to tell the Court in America what the maximum speed you expected of the "Olympic" was. I just call your attention to it; you may not remember it. Senator Fletcher put to you this question: "You say you expected in the 'Titanic' the same speed that the 'Olympic' had, but you did not mention that speed?" And your answer was: "I should call the 'Olympic' a good 22-knot ship. She can do better under very favourable circumstances; I think she can work up to 22½ or perhaps 22¾ as a maximum"?
- I think that is about right.
19052. And the "Titanic"?
- We were hoping that she would do a little bit better than that.
19053. A quarter of a knot, do you mean?
- Yes, something like that, a little bit better, so we were told by our shipbuilders.
19054. According to that, then, if she was going 22 knots, that, at any rate, would be within a knot of her maximum speed in favourable circumstances?
- I should think so.
19055. I think there is only one other matter I want to ask you about. You knew, I presume, that you had not boats sufficient on the "Titanic" to accommodate all the passengers and crew?
- Yes.
19056. So that I mean, supposing all your boats did leave the "Titanic" fully loaded, there still must have been a considerable number of passengers and crew left on the ship?
- Yes.
19057. And, indeed, your boat accommodation was not sufficient to take off all the passengers, without the crew, was it?
- I believe not.
19058. (The Attorney-General.) I do not know whether your Lordship remembers the figures. It is 1,178 they could carry, all told, and in fact, she carried 1,316 passengers and 892 crew. The object of these questions I am putting to you, Mr. Ismay, is to draw your attention to this, that at any rate when the last boat left the "Titanic" you must have known that a number of passengers and crew were still on board the vessel?
- I did.
19059. And you have told us that you did not see any on the deck?
- I did not.
19060. At least, I think you limited that to passengers; I am not sure you were asked about the crew?
- There were no passengers on deck.
19061. And you said also that you did not see any as the boat was lowered?
- I did not.
19062. I am not sure whether you said it in answer to the Court, or whether it is only in the statement I have got from you, but at any rate that was your view; as the boat was lowered and you passed the decks you did not see any passengers on the decks?
- I did not.
19063. Where were the passengers then?
- I can only suppose the passengers had gone to the afterend of the ship.
19064. Do you mean you would not be able to see them, as your collapsible being just afore the foremost funnel you would not be able to see what was happening on the afterpart of the ship. Is that what you mean?
- Yes.
19065. That is where you would expect them to be?
- I presume they went there. I was really not thinking about it.
Sir Robert Finlay:
Then I put in the letter of instructions.
19066. (The Commissioner.) I want to ask a question before the witness goes. (To the witness.) Have you made any Enquiry as to whether any other liner was following this track in the direction of America during this day?
- I have not.
19067. Has anyone made any such Enquiry?
- I do not know.
The Commissioner:
Has such Enquiry been made, do you know, Sir Robert?
Sir Robert Finlay:
I am told, My Lord, there were others following it up.
The Commissioner:
Following the same track?
Sir Robert Finlay:
I am told so, My Lord.
The Commissioner:
I should very much like to know what those steamers were and whether they received similar warnings to that received from the "Baltic," and at what speed they were travelling?
Sir Robert Finlay:
We will endeavour to get all that information for your Lordship.
19068. (The Commissioner - To the witness.) Have you a note of any Enquiry as to whether, upon the receipt of warning as to ice, the German liners or the french liners slow down?
- I have no knowledge what they do, My Lord.
19069. Can any information of that kind be obtained as to the practice of these large liners when they receive notice of the existence of ice?
- We could ask for the information, My Lord.
19070. Do you think you could get it?
- I am afraid not, My Lord.
Sir Robert Finlay:
I might suggest, My Lord, that the Board of Trade would probably be able to insist upon the information from British ships as to following this line, according to our information, and what warnings they got, and so on, and I have no doubt if the Board of Trade were to apply they would get the information from the foreign lines which your Lordship has mentioned. I think the Board of Trade can do more than we can.
The Commissioner:
I would just say that if Mr. Ismay or his Company were to ask for the information, it might not be readily granted, but I think if the Board of Trade asked for it, it would be supplied.
The Attorney-General:
I said some time ago that your Lordship should have it when you asked the question some days ago.
19071. (The Commissioner.) Very well. (To the witness.) Now can you tell me, from the information you have got, in your opinion, how many of the watertight compartments were injured, that is to say, broken into, by the collision?
- I think there was water in the first four compartments, from the evidence I have read.
19072. Not the first six?
- I am not including the forepeak.
19073. Then if you included the forepeak, it would make five?
- Yes.
The Commissioner:
Mr. Asquith, will you just point out on the plan where the actual injury to the ship was - how far aft it occurred?
Mr. Raymond Asquith:
The five compartments.
The Commissioner:
Yes, counting the forepeak as one.
Mr. Raymond Asquith:
To there, counting the forepeak as one - that is to say, to No. 6.
Sir Robert Finlay:
But there was some water in No. 6.
The Attorney-General:
Yes.
The Commissioner:
I thought, Mr. Attorney, that the evidence was that there was water coming in in No. 6.
The Attorney-General:
Certainly, My Lord, that is quite right, and I may also say that we have evidence that water was coming into No. 5. Your Lordship will remember that when they came along after fetching the suction pipe from the aftermost funnel they came along, and then when they got to the aftermost door of No. 5, separating No. 4 from No. 5, that they stopped there because they knew that there was water in No. 5. We have direct evidence on that, too. That is how it stands. May I call your Lordship's attention to one piece of evidence which I think has hitherto escaped particular observation, because our attention was not directed to this point, but it is not right to say that the evidence has only established that there were icebergs in the morning when day broke - on the morning of the 15th, that is.
The Commissioner:
No, I am aware of that.
The Attorney-General:
That is on the track.
The Commissioner:
Yes, that is on the track, but I was speaking about ice having been seen on the track before the collision. None was seen, as I understand.
The Attorney-General:
Your Lordship means none was seen by the "Titanic."
The Commissioner:
Yes, by the "Titanic."
The Attorney-General:
No, I agree on account of the iceberg, which was the first thing.
(The Witness withdrew.)
