British Wreck Commissioner's Inquiry

Day 28

Final Arguments

Sir Robert Finlay:
I am glad to say that after the examination of the correspondence and the logs, the statement such as your Lordship asked for with regard to other vessels has been agreed upon. The statement that was produced the other day has been altered in some respects after examining the logs, and we are now agreed that it is accurate. It will save a good deal of trouble.

The Attorney-General:
I will hand in a summary. I have not seen it yet. I see that the letters are summarised in a short table.

The Commissioner:
What letters are these?

The Attorney-General:
These are the replies that were received to the Board of Trade circular letter of the 6th June, which is the letter I read to your Lordship on the last occasion, when we had some discussion as to what was the answer received from the two German lines, as to the course pursued by them, and sailing directions. At that time your Lordship will remember, you indicated that they could not be put in unless my friend Sir Robert allowed them to be put in; he had the right to object. He objected then only for the purpose of considering the documents which he had not then seen. He has now seen them, and we have agreed upon the summary, and we have agreed upon the documents which are now being handed up to the Court. (The same were handed in.)

Sir Robert Finlay:
There is only one addition I want to make. Your Lordship will see that under the head of "White Star Line" in this statement in the margin is "Logs not sent." The logbooks are in Court, and at the service of the Court. I have them here, and I will hand them up now.

The Commissioner:
Do not encumber my table with a number of things which it is not necessary for me to have.

The Attorney-General:
I quite agree. My friend can refer to them without handing them up.

The Commissioner:
I get them here, and then very often I do not know what they have been handed in for.

Sir Robert Finlay:
I entirely sympathise with that point of view.

The Attorney-General:
We may treat them as in, and my friend can refer to any part of them if he wishes.

The Commissioner:
And you will understand I shall not refer to any part of them unless you draw my attention to them.

Sir Robert Finlay:
I do not know that it will be necessary to refer to them. I only wish it to be understood the logbooks are here.

Sir Robert Finlay:
May I indicate what this table is? I think one has been handed up to each of the Assessors as well as your Lordship; the first, "Particulars of vessels in neighbourhood of disaster," you have first there in the summary, the Leyland Line. There is the "Californian" - of course that is already dealt with in the Enquiry - "Instructions to Commanders of vessels: The Commanders must run no risk which might by any possibility result in accident to their ships." That is a summary. The letter is actually here in the documents, but your Lordship really has got enough of it when you have that summary, which is an agreed summary. Then there are the logbooks, showing what has happened with regard to them. Then if you take the Anchor Line, the next one, "No vessels in actual vicinity but 'Caledonia' was warned by wireless of field ice; course altered to southward to avoid it. Sighted ice 9th April." "Instructions to Commanders: Course to be altered on ice being seen or reported. In the event of fog, speed to be reduced. No book of Instructions and Regulations sent; log not sent," and so forth.

The Commissioner:
Where does the Anchor Line trade to?

The Attorney-General:
I think it is Glasgow to New York - Glasgow to the United States, certainly. I am told that they also trade to the Canadian ports, and that we do not quite know what track she was on.

The Commissioner:
I thought so. That would make a difference.

The Attorney-General:
I see what is in your Lordship's mind, and it may be necessary to enquire into it. Of course, these are the general instructions which are given to the Commanders of both.

The Commissioner:
I think the Instructions, so far as they refer to ice, would apply more particularly to the voyages to Canada.

The Attorney-General:
I agree, my Lord, to the extent that you would more probably meet ice on that voyage.

The Commissioner:
For instance, in the Leyland Line, which I do not believe goes to Canada at all, there are no such words. There are no specific references to ice.

The Attorney-General:
No. The Allan Line, which is a Canadian Line, specifically does mention it.

The Commissioner:
Yes, that is another Canadian Line.

The Attorney-General:
Your Lordship will remember that the White Star Line also itself has special regulations with regard to entering ice on the Canadian Line.

The Commissioner:
Yes. And then the Canadian Pacific, again.

The Attorney-General:
They do not seem to make any special reference to ice.

The Commissioner:
I think so. We had the Master of the "Mount Temple." I agree this summary of the letter does not mention it, but the Master of the "Mount Temple" told us he had express directions, either to slow down -

Sir Robert Finlay:
I think your Lordship will find it in the letter appended.

The Commissioner:
However, I think you can leave this with me, Mr. Attorney.

The Attorney-General:
Yes, certainly. I see it is a letter of 11th June: "I have no knowledge of what other Shipmasters do" - this is the manager of the Canadian Pacific Line writing - "but our Masters know that they must not enter even light field ice or touch ice of any kind." That bears out what the Master of the "Mount Temple" says. The summary does not indicate that, as your Lordship sees, but it is there. It is under date 11th June. Then I have here some letters which I have not seen before, but they are answers which have been made, I understand, to the White Star Line, which has also been making some inquiries with the same object. They had better be handed in. My friends wish them handed in. Will you follow this, Sir Robert, because it does not seem very desirable to encumber the Court with more documents than are necessary? I think the only addition to what we have already in evidence is the Hamburg-Amerika Line.

Sir Robert Finlay:
Yes.

The Commissioner:
I have here the Norddeutscher, which is a sufficient answer for my guidance, because I assume that the Hamburg-Amerika is the same: "Steamers were going full speed as long as the weather kept clear."

The Attorney-General:
Very well.

The Commissioner:
That looked as though they followed the same practice as the British ships.

The Attorney-General:
Now, my Lord, there is one matter I want to mention to avoid any possible misapprehension. With reference to my friend, Mr. Duke, who appeared for Sir Cosmo and Lady Duff-Gordon - I mention it because I happen to have seen him with reference to it - of course he is ready to come if there were any necessity, but I indicated to him what I have already told your Lordship with reference to them, that is to say that I was going to make no comment whatever upon their evidence, except in so far as it became necessary in regard to that particular boat, but not in any way reflecting upon them. I had already said that, and therefore he did not propose to attend unless any other of my friends was going to make an attack upon them. I told him I understood from what had happened that that was not going to take place, and that therefore he need not appear; but if there is any intention of making an attack upon them it ought to be stated, so that he may have notice of it, and be here whenever the attack is taking place.

The Commissioner:
What is your view, Mr. Edwards and Mr. Scanlan?

Mr. Clement Edwards:
I was going rather to ask your Lordship's direction. I was responsible in the first place for getting out the evidence as to the payment of money. I quite recognise, whatever might be our view or whatever might be your Lordship's view, about the actual conduct of any single passenger, it is not material to the issues which you have to try, except in so far as it may have had a certain effect in seducing the mind of the man responsible for navigating the boat from any idea there may have been of going back to the rescue. Of course it is a very serious matter in the case of that boat, which was practically empty, and was capable of saving a great number of people. It may be essential to point out the possible effect of a certain line of conduct on the part of the passengers; and subject to what your Lordship might say, I did propose commenting upon the evidence as given against and by Sir Cosmo Duff-Gordon and Lady Duff-Gordon, in so far as it is calculated, or may be calculated, to have affected the mind of those responsible for the conduct of that particular boat. Therefore, I think, those who are representing Sir Cosmo and Lady Duff-Gordon ought to be apprised of the fact, subject of course to what your Lordship may say, that there is an intention to call attention to the evidence relating to that part of the case.

The Commissioner:
What do you say, Mr. Scanlan?

Mr. Scanlan:
I have felt that I could with propriety in discharging what I conceive to be my duty to my clients, leave the question of the personal conduct of the Duff-Gordon's out of this case. I feel I am not debarred on that account from making a comment on the fact that this particular boat was not filled with a proper complement of persons. But I am going to attribute that, my Lord, to another cause. I am going to attribute the fact that the boat was not filled to another cause, to the want of discipline. I shall have some remarks to make upon that when I come to it, but not at all in reference to the personal conduct of the Duff-Gordon's.

The Attorney-General:
I have never said that I am not going to comment upon the conduct of the man who was in charge of the boat, and responsible for it, and also to some extent to what happened in the boat. What I have said, and what I intend to adhere to, is that I am going to make no comment on the conduct of Sir Cosmo Duff-Gordon and Lady Duff-Gordon. As I understand, the personal incident was introduced at first by some underlying suggestion that Sir Cosmo and Lady Duff-Gordon had promised money to the men not to go back to the spot at which the "Titanic" had sunk, in order that they might run no risk. Of course, if there had been evidence of that, it would be a matter, I presume, which your Lordship would not for a moment have passed over. But looking at the evidence, of course it is quite clear upon the evidence that that did not take place. I have been through it very carefully. And short of that, whether or not, having regard to what I may call the highest duties which are imposed upon persons in such circumstances, they should have gone back or should have done their best to persuade the men in charge of the boat to go back, is not a matter which it seems to me your Lordship will have to deal with. It has almost always to be left to considerations which are really not considerations which would sway a Court of law. Men and women will always differ to all eternity between what should be done in circumstances such as those described, and therefore it is that I am making no comment, and intend making no criticism in any way upon what took place with regard to that. It seemed to me not to be a matter which your Lordship would deal with. But the boat, and the conduct of the man in charge of the boat, I think we must deal with. I indicated that some days ago when I first mentioned this.

The Commissioner:
My own view of the matter is this: It is material to enquire why that particular boat did not contain a proper number of passengers, and to the extent to which the acts or conduct of Sir Cosmo Duff-Gordon can explain, or can be said to explain, why that boat did not contain a full or proper complement of passengers. I think it is quite right that what he said and what he did and what his wife said and did, should be enquired into. But beyond that I do not see that it is at all necessary to go. I do not propose myself to make any reflections, at present at all events, at all upon the conduct of either the gentleman or his wife, and I want to add that if I do not my silence is not to be taken as any adverse reflection on him at all. I shall be silent simply because it has got nothing to do with what I have before me.

The Attorney-General:
As your Lordship pleases.

The Commissioner:
I do not know whether I have made it plain. I think, Mr. Edwards and Mr. Scanlan, you are both entitled to make any comments that you think proper upon the acts and conduct of Sir Cosmo Duff-Gordon, so far as they may be said to explain why that boat did not succeed in saving more people. I think you are quite entitled to do that, and I do not think you would discharge your duty if you did not do it; but, at the same time, it occurs to me that you may be able to do it without any reflections upon his conduct as a man.

The Attorney-General:
There is one other matter I want to mention.

The Commissioner:
There is one I want to mention, and I will do it when you have finished.

The Attorney-General:
After I left on Wednesday your Lordship had a little discussion with my friends, Mr. Butler Aspinall and Mr. Laing, who are, of course, best qualified to express their views as to the practice in these Enquiries. My Lord, I confess that I thought it was necessary, and I think it necessary now, to make some observations to your Lordship with regard to what took place on that occasion, so that at any rate it may be made clear what the argument is which will be put to the Court by me at the end of this Enquiry, and so that my learned friend, Sir Robert Finlay, who I understand is representing also Captain Smith -

Sir Robert Finlay:
Yes.

The Attorney-General:
Will have the opportunity of dealing with what I am about to say. I am very anxious, as your Lordship will understand, not in any way to press anything against either Captain Smith or the other Officers who, unfortunately, met their fate on this occasion - so far as it is possible for me, whilst, at the same time doing my duty in this Enquiry I should wish to avoid it. The practice of these Courts of Enquiry has been, speaking generally, and only generally, as your Lordship will see in a moment, not to enquire whether or not an Officer who does not survive the loss of his ship has been negligent. The reason of it is not far to seek. In the ordinary course of these enquiries if an allegation is going to be made of negligence against an Officer which would, if found by the Court, affect his certificate, the practice - and it is a practice which is regulated by the Rules - necessitates that notice must be given to him so that he may appear and defend himself. Of course, in the case of an Officer who has not survived, it is impossible to deal with his certificate; the Court does not do it; and no notice to his representatives is necessary because of that fact. It is not necessary to go into it more in detail. Your Lordship will remember that I indicated this in opening the case, and pointed out that we were not asking your Lordship to find anything with regard to the certificates of the Officers, because those who were in charge had succumbed in this disaster. But, my Lord, having regard to the nature of this Enquiry, and to what I think I am justified in calling the somewhat extraordinary character of this Enquiry, and also of the disaster, I cannot find, according to what I have been able to ascertain about the practice, that there is anything which would prevent your Lordship coming to a conclusion - assuming that you did, of course - I will not say, coming to a conclusion, but I will say considering and determining whether or not you think this vessel was navigated with proper and seamanlike care. With great respect, it does seem to me that it is not possible to deal with this Enquiry and to satisfactorily answer the questions that are put without, at least, coming to some conclusion with regard to that question.

Sir Robert Finlay:
I quite agree.

The Attorney-General:
I am glad my learned friend agrees. I wanted to make it quite plain that it must be so. The reason I am mentioning it is that your Lordship did indicate the view which is in accordance with the general practice, but there is a case to which I wanted to call attention only because it shows so plainly that that practice is not an invariable one.

The Commissioner:
I do not think either Mr. Laing, or Mr. Aspinall suggested the contrary.

Sir Robert Finlay:
I may say that I shall certainly ask for no indulgence on the ground of the unhappy death of these Officers. I shall ask the opinion of the Court, and I shall ask the Court to say that there was no error of judgment on their part whatever.

The Commissioner:
That means also no negligence.

Sir Robert Finlay:
Certainly.

The Commissioner:
It includes it - no negligence or error of judgment?

Sir Robert Finlay:
Yes. I used the expression "error of judgment" because your Lordship put that as denoting something less than negligence - not even an error of judgment. On behalf of every one of those Officers I want the fullest Enquiry into it, and I give the Attorney-General notice that I shall submit to the Court that they did what was right under the circumstances, and that no blame of any sort or kind is imputable to any of them.

The Attorney-General:
As long as it is quite clear that the matter is to be dealt with by the Court, I am satisfied. I want my learned friend to be quite clear that it will be my duty to submit to the Court some considerations which, if they commend themselves to the Court and are accepted would not agree with the view which my learned friend must necessarily contend for. I wanted it to be made quite clear, as I have to speak at the end. All I have to do is to put considerations to the Court.

The Commissioner:
Very well, you have given full notice now to the others.

Mr. Clement Edwards:
There is one matter, my Lord, a little outside the precise scope of my particular duties here which I want to mention.

Sir Robert Finlay:
Forgive me, there is one very small matter I have to mention. Something was said about the steerage-way of the "Titanic" when Sir Ernest Shackleton was in the box. He put it at 10 knots. I am told it would have steerage-way at 6 knots. Mr. Wilding is not here today, but he will be here on Monday and will state that.

The Attorney-General:
I should accept that.

Sir Robert Finlay:
Sir Ernest put it too high. My learned friend will not want evidence on that point.

The Attorney-General:
No, I accept that statement.

Sir Robert Finlay:
Mr. Wilding will be here on Monday if my learned friend desires him to make the statement.

Mr. Clement Edwards:
My Lord, in this Enquiry, except in the case where certain reflections were passed by a Witness on the conduct of particular passengers, there have been no passengers called to give evidence. I know there is a perfectly satisfactory explanation why that is so, but I think in the public interest it might be well if the learned Attorney-General indicated why that course has been taken.

The Attorney-General:
I am quite ready to do so. I thought I had already done so, but I will state it in two sentences. We found it useless to call passengers who could only state what has already been stated by the Officers and crew who have been called. If I had found in any proof or document submitted to me that any passengers could prove anything which was in conflict with what had been said on any material point, of course, I should have called them. As your Lordship knows, at an early stage, and since, as intimated to my learned friend, Mr. Harbinson, who naturally had some statements before him, I would call any passenger whose proof or statement was put before me, if it added anything to the testimony which we already have. My own view, after consideration of a great many statements was that it was useless repetition, and that therefore it was unnecessary to put it before the Court.

The Commissioner:
That will probably be satisfactory to Mr. Edwards. There was one matter I was asked to bring to your notice. When the answers were being received to the C.Q.D. messages from the "Titanic," apparently Phillips had a great difficulty in hearing them because of the noise of the steam. The question I was asked to put to you was this: Is it not possible to arrange that messages received in the Marconi room as well as despatched can be received in a silent cabin - I believe it is called.

The Attorney-General:
It would be the same room, would it not?

The Commissioner:
I am told it is so on board the vessels in the Navy.

The Attorney-General:
It would be in the same room. They are received and sent in the same room.

The Commissioner:
As I understand, they are sent from what is called the silent cabin, and the question is, could not it be arranged that they should also be received in a similar cabin, or in the same cabin, so that the noise should not interfere with hearing the message.

The Attorney-General:
My impression is that they are received and sent in the same room. I do not follow how they could be received in a different room from the one in which they are sent. I should think they are received and transmitted in the same room.

The Commissioner:
If that is so, I do not understand why the noise of steam should prevent them hearing.

The Attorney-General:
Mr. Turnbull is here. May we ask him the question?

25623. (The Commissioner.) Yes. (To Mr. Turnbull.) Will you please answer the question. Have you heard what I was asking?

Mr. Turnbull:
Yes.

25624. (The Commissioner.) What is the explanation?

Mr. Turnbull:
I think, on these large Trans-Atlantic liners, almost everyone of them, without exception, has the cabin in the most silent place in the ship. That is one of the specifications we always ask for. The cabin is placed amidships for two reasons - one because that is the most silent place, and another because it is the best place technically. In the case of the "Titanic" the instruments were divided into two rooms. The transmitting instruments, which cause a certain amount of noise, were placed inside a silent chamber, so that the noise of the signals as transmitted would not be heard outside or by passengers. We have to preserve the secrecy of telegrams as far as possible. In the receiving cabin, in all ordinary circumstances under which the "Titanic" is sailed, there would be practically no noise at all. It was only, I think, under the exceptional circumstances of the "Titanic" being at full steam and being suddenly stopped that there was an excessive blow-off at a pipe in the immediate neighbourhood of the station. I do not think that would ever have occurred in ordinary practice. I understand from Mr. Bride that this noise was brought to the notice of the Captain and he had it stopped immediately. I do not know how he did have it stopped. I suppose he arranged that.

25625. (The Commissioner.) I do not see how he could have stopped that?

Mr. Turnbull:
By some arrangement in the engine room, I suppose.

25626. (The Commissioner.) He could not stop that blow-off.

Mr. Turnbull:
It might be diverted to another exhaust pipe.

25627. (The Commissioner.) It is pointed out to me that the answers to their messages were of the greatest importance, and yet they could not hear them because of the noise, and it is suggested to me that there should be some chamber in which to receive the messages, and from which the noise outside in the ship should be excluded?

Mr. Turnbull:
We used to do that years ago when wireless was in its infancy and when it was necessary to reinforce the strength of the signals as much as possible; but at the present day the signals are so strong within the normal range of shipping stations, that it is not necessary to go to the expense.

25628. (The Commissioner.) It would have been a very good thing on this occasion?

Mr. Turnbull:
Yes, my Lord, it would.

25629. (The Commissioner.) I daresay the signals are very strong, but it would have been a very desirable thing that the messages which were being received by the "Titanic" on this occasion should have been heard.

Mr. Turnbull:
There are occasions when we find it is impossible to fulfill the conditions of silence to the extent that we desire. For instance, in the case of a winch being outside, or pumps of any description making a noise, then we do have the receiving room silenced as much as possible.

25630. (The Commissioner.) Cannot you have a cabinet?

Mr. Turnbull:
We do, my Lord.

25631. (The Commissioner.) So constructed as to keep out the sounds of a winch?

Mr. Turnbull:
We have them constructed to diminish sound as much as possible.

Continued >