British Wreck Commissioner's Inquiry

Day 35

Final Arguments

The Commissioner:
Sir Robert, I was asking Mr. Laing in your absence on Saturday about Lightoller's evidence; it presents, if it is to be accepted, in my opinion, considerable difficulties with regard to your theory. First of all there was clearly in my mind the discussion about every so-called abnormality which is relied upon before the Commission, except the swell, and the swell does not appear to me to make any difficulty, because they were not anticipating seeing any fringe round the bergs. That is the effect of the conversation. They did not anticipate any fringe round the bergs, and it was one of the difficulties they discussed. Therefore, it seems to me the absence of swell is not of any importance. The other difficulty that I had with reference to your theory is this. Lightoller made a calculation and came to the conclusion that they would reach ice at half-past 9. Now, Mr. Laing suggested that that was not the true effect of this evidence; that all that he meant was that they would reach the region in which ice had been notified. That does not seem to me to be the effect of his evidence. I think his evidence means that in his opinion they would come where they might expect to see ice, and if he did make a calculation of that kind, and it was properly made, it is inconsistent with your theory that all the notified ice had, by the time of the collision, passed away.

Sir Robert Finlay:
May I deal with both those points?

The Commissioner:
If you please.

Sir Robert Finlay:
I will take the second first, because I submit it admits of a short answer. Will your Lordship kindly look at the large chart which I handed up where the time is marked at which the "Titanic" reached 49 degrees and also the time when she reached 11 o'clock when she would be further on her course. Your Lordship will see soon after 9 o'clock the "Titanic" gets just beyond 49 degrees. Your Lordship sees the line down there does not mean any meridian; it is a line dividing the chart into 20 mile squares. At the top your Lordship will see longitude 49, and then if your Lordship goes down to the track which the "Titanic" took your Lordship will see that at 9 she was short of 49 degrees.

The Commissioner:
I do not follow you.

Sir Robert Finlay:
The track where the "Titanic" was proceeding where you have the legend "';Titanic's' course after 5.50 p.m., S. 50 W. true, speed 22 knots." Your Lordship sees "9 p.m." marked there. That is short of 49 degrees.

The Commissioner:
It is slightly short of 49 degrees; about 3 miles.

Sir Robert Finlay:
I think about 3 minutes.

The Commissioner:
It is three miles in distance.

Sir Robert Finlay:
Exactly. One calculation by which they would get soon after 9, to the region to which the "Caronia" message referred, is one of those which Lightoller referred to, that is his own calculation. He said: I made a mental note - I remember the expression - of 49 deg., because I considered the longitude of importance. That relates to the "Caronia."

The other, the 11 o'clock, relates to the "Baltic." Your Lordship will see that almost immediately below the position of the iceberg reported by the "Baltic" is "11 p.m.," as the position of the "Titanic"; so that it is quite clear that the explanation as I submit of the discrepancy is what Lightoller himself suggested, that Moody must have been dealing with the "Baltic" ice, while he, Lightoller, was dealing with the "Caronia" ice.

The Commissioner:
Yes. It does not seem to me to matter which they were dealing with. Both of them came to the conclusion that they would possibly sight ice, and the calculations were based on one or other of the three telegrams.

Sir Robert Finlay:
Yes.

The Commissioner:
And that calculation, if it is accurate, seems to me to be inconsistent with your theory that they could not have sighted ice at that time, that none of the ice of the three messages could be sighted, because, as you put it to me, the ice had gone further South, and they were passing round the stern of the bergs.

Sir Robert Finlay:
I submit there is no inconsistency at all, my Lord. What they apprehended was, although no other ice had been reported, and although the course that they took would avoid, and did avoid, the ice which had been reported, yet they had got to the longitude where this ice had been reported, and it was, of course, always possible that there might be other ice.

The Commissioner:
Do not you see the danger of that? If they knew that they were in the region where ice might be, where icebergs might be, then they ought to have taken that circumstance into consideration.

Sir Robert Finlay:
I think they did, my Lord, as I shall show in answering your Lordship's other question; but I hope that I have made clear that the explanation which Lightoller gave of that discrepancy between the two calculations is a correct one.

The Commissioner:
I remember very well what he said, and a very unsatisfactory explanation it was.

Sir Robert Finlay:
But, my Lord, it exactly fits in with the position of the "Titanic" at 9 o'clock and at 11 o'clock.

The Commissioner:
It may be, but if you remember he said when Moody told him that he expected to meet ice about 11 o'clock, "I noticed that it was wrong, but I did not say so; he was busy at the time and I did not want to disturb him." It appears to me a most unsatisfactory explanation, but that is what he says. Then he says, "I thought" - he said this subsequently and seems very like an afterthought - "I thought that Moody's calculation was based on some other telegram."

Sir Robert Finlay:
My Lord, I do not know whether Mr. Lightoller is now in the country. If your Lordship thinks it might conduce to the interests of truth to recall him -

The Commissioner:
I do not want to have Mr. Lightoller back; I am quite satisfied with the evidence as far as it goes.

Sir Robert Finlay:
If your Lordship pleases.

The Commissioner:
I should not care for any evidence of Lightoller coming after the discussion.

Sir Robert Finlay:
If your Lordship pleases.

The Commissioner:
If you follow what I mean -

Sir Robert Finlay:
I follow perfectly. My submission is that Lightoller's evidence as it stands is clear and consistent with the facts so far as relates to these two messages, and I submit it does not touch the point which I made that all this ice that was reported - the "Baltic" ice and the "Caronia" ice, as well, of course, as the "Californian" ice which was far to the Eastward - was successfully avoided, and the course taken was one which would avoid it, because, while the field ice and the smaller bergs would be well to the Northward, the big bergs must have gone to the South.

The Commissioner:
I have been thinking very anxiously about your theory about the Labrador Current taking these big bergs to the South, and I shall give it great consideration. But it seems to me that your admission that there might have been other bergs in the track which they were following, put upon them, if it be true, the obligation to do more than they did.

Sir Robert Finlay:
My Lord, I submit not for this reason. As soon as you have had a report of ice in a particular longitude, although you have taken a course which avoids the ice which is reported, every prudent navigator will take into account that there may possibly be other bergs; and then it comes back to the question whether, by following the course which is invariably adopted in North Atlantic navigation, of keeping the speed at which the vessel was going, there was anything in the slightest degree blameworthy.

The Commissioner:
Then you come to the abnormality?

Sir Robert Finlay:
I do, my Lord. I shall deal with that in answering your Lordship's second question.

The Commissioner:
Let me make it clear as we go along. There is a vast amount of evidence, and very good evidence too, good in quality and a great deal in quantity, to show that it has not been for a quarter of a century or more the practice to alter the speed merely because ice is to be seen, because experience tells them that they can always avoid it. But then there arises the natural question: then why did not you avoid this?

Sir Robert Finlay:
That brings us to the abnormality.

The Commissioner:
Yes, then comes the excuse for not avoiding it, the abnormality.

Sir Robert Finlay:
May I put it as the reason why we were not successful in avoiding it? But before I pass from the practice, might I call attention to the fact that not only is there a vast body of evidence all consistent, but there is no contradiction from anyone engaged in that trade?

The Commissioner:
It may be that I am quite satisfied that they were following a well known practice which was justified by experience - as you pointed out in your speech, justified by the excellent results in the absence of accidents, in following that course. That may be; but why did not they see it?

Sir Robert Finlay:
That brings me to answer your Lordship's second question, and that relates to this. The circumstances were abnormal in two respects: in the first place the swell, if it had existed, as everyone believed it did exist, would have shown a distinct ripple at the foot of the berg, not so great, of course, as there would have been if there had been wind, but still perfectly noticeable. May I state one other point - that there would have been a second indication, which was also referred to, between Mr. Lightoller and the Captain, and that is this, that if you have got a berg which turns its black side to you, you get a light over the top, owing to the fact that the other side is white: but here we had that very rare phenomenon, a black berg with no white side.

Now, what I am putting to your Lordship is this - and I submit, when the evidence is looked at, it is clear - that this catastrophe arose from the fact that the "Titanic" was properly pursuing the regular practice in relying on what experience has shown to be the case, that you can see the bergs in time to avoid them. She did not see the berg in time to avoid it, because you had the extraordinary fact that two things, each rare in itself, a black berg and no swell, coincided; and thereby the ship did not get warning before she was upon it.

May I say one word with regard to the conversation with the Captain. We are now entirely in your Lordship's hands as to what took place upon that occasion, but what I wish to put before your Lordship is that it is clear that conversation related only to the absence of wind. I will show your Lordship - I am not going to make a speech, of course, but to refer to one or two questions and answers - that they never knew until they got to the water that there was no swell, and the combination - the extraordinary combination - was a black berg and not even a swell.

Will your Lordship kindly look at page 305, Question 13569. The Solicitor-General is examining. "Tell us what you were going to say? - (A.) In the event of meeting ice there are many things we look for. In the first place a slight breeze. Of course, the stronger the breeze the more visible will the ice be, or rather the breakers on the ice. Therefore at any time when there is a slight breeze you will always see at nighttime a phosphorescent line round a berg, growler, or whatever it may be; the slight swell which we invariably look for in the North Atlantic causes the same effect, the break on the base of the berg, so showing a phosphorescent glow. All bergs - all ice more or less have a crystallised side. (Q.) Is it white? - (A.) Yes; it has been crystallised through exposure and that in all cases will reflect a certain amount of light, what is termed ice-blink, and that ice-blink from a fairly large berg you will frequently see before the bergs comes above the horizon. (Q.) Now let me follow. Was there any breeze on this night? - (A.) When I left the deck at 10 o'clock there was a slight breeze - Oh, pardon me, no. I take that back. No, it was calm, perfectly calm. (Q.) And there was no breeze. Was there any? - (A.) As far as we could see from the bridge the sea was comparatively smooth. Not that we expected it to be smooth, because looking from the ship's bridge very frequently with quite a swell on the sea will appear just as smooth as a billiard table, perfectly smooth; you cannot detect the swell. The higher you are the more difficult it is to detect a slight swell. (Q.) That means, then, does it not, that if you are on the bridge and you are relying on the fact that there may be a slight swell, you really cannot tell from the bridge whether there is a swell or not - a slight swell? - (A.) We look at it rather the other way - that, though the sea may appear smooth, we pretty well know that there is a swell, though it may not be visible to the eye, nor yet have any effect on the ship. It is a most rare occurrence - (Q.) You mean there nearly always is a swell in the North Atlantic? - (A.) This is the first time in my experience in the Atlantic in 24 years, and I have been going across the Atlantic nearly all the time, of seeing an absolutely flat sea. (Q.) Do you agree from that experience that this was an occasion when it was an absolutely flat sea? - (A.) Absolutely flat. (The Commissioner.) Not in fact, but to all appearance? - (A.) In fact, my Lord. (The Solicitor-General.) He means in fact, my Lord. (The Commissioner.) Do you mean there was no swell at all? - (A.) I mean to say that the sea was so absolutely flat that when we lowered the boats down we had to actually overhaul the tackles to unhook them, because there was not the slightest lift on the boat to allow for slacking, unhooked." That the absence of swell they detected afterwards when they got down to the water; they did not know it from the deck. I think your Lordship will recollect that one of the Assessors, I think it was Captain Clarke, informed your Lordship in the course of the case, as your Lordship stated, that sailors talk of it as calm although there is a swell on.

Then, on page 306, the Witness goes on at Question 13615: "At five minutes to 9, when the Commander came on the bridge (I will give it to you as near as I can remember.) he remarked that it was cold, and as far as I remember, I said, 'Yes, it is very cold, sir.' In fact, I said, 'it is only 1 deg. above freezing. I have sent word down to the carpenter,'" and so on - "We then commenced to speak about the weather. He said, 'There is not much wind.' I said, 'No, it is a flat calm as a matter of fact.' He repeated it; he said, 'A flat calm.' I said, 'Yes, quite flat, there is no wind.' I said something about it was rather a pity the breeze had not kept up whilst we were going through the ice region. Of course, my reason was obvious; he knew I meant the water ripples breaking on the base of the berg. (Q.) You said it was a pity there was not a breeze? - (A.) Yes, I said , 'It is a pity there is not a breeze,' and we went on to discuss the weather. He was then getting his eyesight, you know, and he said, 'Yes, it seems quite clear,' and I said, 'Yes, it is perfectly clear.' It was a beautiful night, there was not a cloud in the sky. The sea was apparently smooth, and there was no wind, but at that time you could see the stars rising and setting with absolute distinctness. (Q.) On the horizon? - (A.) On the horizon. We then discussed the indications of ice. I remember saying, 'In any case there will be a certain amount of reflected lights from the bergs.' He said, 'Oh yes, there will be a certain amount of reflected light.' I said, or he said; blue was said between us - that even though the blue side of the berg was towards us, probably the outline, the white outline would give us sufficient warning, that we should be able to see it a good distance, and, as far as we could see, we should be able to see it. Of course, it was just with regard to that possibility of the blue side being towards us, and that if it did happen to be turned with the purely blue side towards us, there would still be the white outline. (The Commissioner.) Then you had both made up your minds at that time that you were about to encounter icebergs? - (A.) No, my Lord, not necessarily."

That merely means they were in the region where the possibility must be taken into account.

"(Q.) It sounds very like it, you know? - (A.) No, not necessarily, my Lord. (Q.) You were both talking about what those icebergs would show to you? - (A.) As a natural precaution. We knew we were in the vicinity of ice, and though you cross the Atlantic for years and have ice reported and never see it, and at other times it is not reported and you do see it, you nevertheless do take necessary precautions, all you can, to make perfectly sure that the weather is clear and that the Officers understand the indications of ice and all that sort of thing. That is a necessary precaution that is always taken. (The Solicitor-General.) There are one or two things about that I should like to be clear about. I caught you saying that you, or the Captain, said it was a pity there was not a little breeze because it would have shown the iceberg? - (A.) Yes, it would have assisted. (Q.) Then you both realised at the time, did you, that since it was a flat calm it would be more difficult to see the ice? - (A.) As far as the case of the berg was concerned, yes, it would be more difficult; naturally you would not see the water breaking on it if there was no wind; and so you would not have that to look for. (Q.) Do you remember when the Captain was on the bridge with you, did you tell him that, as you made it out, you would get to the danger zone - to the ice region - about half-past 9? - (A.) No. (Q.) Was anything said about the time when you would get to it? - (A.) No, not that I remember." And then follows a good deal about Mr. Moody and his calculation.

So that your Lordship sees that that conversation with the Captain referred to the two things, the two indications they would get if they came across an iceberg - the one was the white fringe on the top even though the dark side of the iceberg were turned towards them, they would see the white light over the top from the other side, it being crystalline and white from exposure to the weather. They did not get that because this was a quite black berg. The other indication was the indication from the breaking of the water at the foot of the berg, that they would have if there were wind, and that they would have too, in a less degree, if there were a swell. They knew there was no wind, and they discussed that it was unlucky, because that would have accentuated it.

The Commissioner:
This conversation reads to me as if they knew there would be no breaking of water on the base of the iceberg.

Sir Robert Finlay:
That is quite inconsistent with a great deal of the other evidence, my Lord; it is quite inconsistent with what Mr. Lightoller said on the previous page.

The Commissioner:
Naturally you would not see the water breaking if there was no wind.

Sir Robert Finlay:
Will your Lordship look at what he said on the previous page, at Question 13569: "Of course, the stronger the breeze the more visible will the ice be, or rather the breakers on the ice. Therefore, at any time when there is a slight breeze you will always see at nighttime a phosphorescent line round a berg, growler, or whatever it may be; the slight swell which we invariably look for in the North Atlantic causes the same effect, the break on the base of the berg, so showing a phosphorescent glow."

The Commissioner:
Then why were they discussing the absence of wind if they believed there was a swell as you say they did at that time; and if the swell would have produced the same effect on the bottom of the berg, why was it material to discuss the question of the absence of wind?

Sir Robert Finlay:
That brings us back to the consideration which comes up every time. We have not here Captain Smith to give us what was in his mind, but one can, I think, see what Mr. Lightoller meant. If there were wind there would be a much more marked ripple, phosphorescent light at the foot of the berg, than if you had only a swell; but if you had a swell there would be that light, enough to give warning. It would not be nearly so marked as if there was wind. I do most respectfully put it to your Lordship that that is the effect of the evidence.

Now, will your Lordship kindly look at what Sir Ernest Shackleton says at the top of page 721. The earlier part of the answer relates to another matter. I am on Question 25063, the last sentence of which is at the top of page 721. Sir Ernest says, "Of course, that particular night was an abnormal night at sea in being a flat calm; it is a thing that might never occur again. (Q.) That is what Mr. Lightoller says. You say apparently it is very rare to get such a flat calm as there was that night?"

The Attorney-General:
That means there, a calm without a swell.

Sir Robert Finlay:
Clearly; that is the whole point. "(A.) I only remember it once or twice in about 20 years' experience - the sea absolutely calm, without a swell, as it was recorded to have been."

The Commissioner:
It is not an unknown thing according to Sir Ernest Shackleton; he says once or twice in 20 years. It appears to me that is a matter that a good sailor would take into consideration.

Sir Robert Finlay:
But you must also take the other circumstance, that it is a black berg, all black.

The Commissioner:
They had been discussing something which appears to me to have been very nearly the same as a black berg, that is to say, a berg presenting what they call its blue side.

Sir Robert Finlay:
But there is this notable difference, that if it is a berg with a blue side, the other side is white.

The Commissioner:
And they get the fringe?

Sir Robert Finlay:
And you see the fringe. They were entitled to rely upon the overwhelming probability that they would have one or other of these indications even if the berg were turning its black side. Of course, the enormous probability was that the berg would be white, as it was described by men who have spent their lives in the Atlantic, who told your Lordship over and over again, many of them, that they saw a white berg, a great thing as white as that great white cartoon there. That is what they have seen. That is what in all but the rarest cases they do see. If they do by any chance see the blue side, the dark side of a berg which has been torn off, then they have the glimmer at the top. Here they did not have that, but they had the extraordinary combination of a totally black berg, with not even a swell to show the presence of the berg by the ripple that that would have produced - not nearly so strong as if there had been wind, but still quite strong enough to have given an indication.

I therefore most respectfully submit to your Lordship that it would not be right to find that there was anything blameworthy in following the practice which every man who has sailed the Atlantic for a long period past would have adopted.

That leads me to one other observation. My friend, the Attorney-General, I am told, said Mr. Ismay asserted it would be right to go on at the same speed. Mr. Ismay is most anxious that it should be made clear that he never intended to say anything of the kind, and when his answer is looked at, I submit it is clear he did not. I will not trouble your Lordship with it, because your Lordship said I need not trouble about it; but what Mr. Ismay, of course, means is this. This accident has revealed in the first place the encroachment of ice much further to the South; in the second place, it is brought home to every one that there may be this extraordinary combination of circumstances, and as regards the practice in the future it may very well be that your Lordship will think it right to recommend that that practice should be modified in the view of what has happened. What I do respectfully submit is that it is impossible to say there was anything blameworthy in the course that was taken by Captain Smith.

The Commissioner:
I am much obliged to you, Sir Robert.

The Attorney-General:
The questions to which my friend, Sir Robert, has been addressing himself are matters upon which I addressed you at length on Saturday, and the only one observation I desire to make in answer to my friend's remarks this morning is this: If you look at page 73, Question 2442, the evidence of Lee, one of the look-out men, you will see that there was the white fringe on the top, of which my friend was speaking.

Sir Robert Finlay:
Oh, no, not at all.

The Attorney-General:
It is really no good saying "not at all." I am going to read the question and answer.

Sir Robert Finlay:
It is every good; when you have read it, you will see it is not.

The Attorney-General:
I am not speaking of the ripple. This is not the ripple at the base of the berg; this what is at the top. "(Q.) It was a dark mass that appeared, you say? - (A.) Through this haze, and as she moved away from it, there was just a white fringe along the top."

Sir Robert Finlay:
Yes, but then you must take 2441 with it.

The Attorney-General:
"Can you give us any idea of the breadth. What did it look like? It was something which was above the forecastle? - (A.) It was a dark mass that came through that haze and there was no white appearing until it was just close alongside the ship and that was just a fringe at the top. (Q.) It was a dark mass that appeared, you say? - (A.) Through this haze, and as she moved away from it, there was just a white fringe along the top. That was the only white about it, until she passed by, and then you could see she was white; one side of it seemed to be black, and the other side seemed to be white. When I had a look at it going astern it appeared to be white."

The Commissioner:
You must remember that the iceberg at this time was in the glare of the lights of the "Titanic."

Sir Robert Finlay:
Yes, my Lord, the next question shows that: "At that time the ship would be throwing some light upon it; there were lights on your own ship? - (A.) It might have been that." I submit that entirely disproves my friend's view.

The Attorney-General:
I am not dealing with that. With respect, it does not seem to me that what my friend has said this morning has in the slightest degree affected the view that was put before your Lordship, at least the argument that I addressed to you on Saturday, because all that my friend has said this morning, and, if I may say so, has said with all the force that he commands, only adds this, that there were these two abnormal or unusual conditions which I accepted on Saturday, when I argued the case before you, as the two abnormal conditions upon which my friend relied. They were all, however, matters which I dealt with then, and I agree with him that the result of the evidence shows that the excuse put forward must depend upon those two conditions. I analysed them then, and I do not propose to go into them at any further length. The only supplementary reference that I will make to what was said then, and I only make it because in consequence of what your Lordship said on the last occasion, I did not refer to the evidence upon it is this: My friend said to me just now, and said quite rightly - I call your Lordship's particular attention to it - that when Sir Ernest Shackleton is talking of a flat calm he means what I meant by a flat calm on Saturday when I referred to the evidence. I said a flat calm is a calm in which there is no swell. My friend agrees with me certainly, that when Sir Ernest Shackleton is speaking of it, that when he speaks of a flat calm -

Sir Robert Finlay:
It is used in both senses.

The Attorney-General:
I know it is, but it is no answer to the point I am making. I quite agree, and my friend is quite entitled to say that it may be when you speak of a flat calm in consequence of certain answers that Lightoller gave, that he is speaking there of a calm, a perfectly smooth sea, apparently presenting a flat surface, and nevertheless with a swell, and it may be he is speaking of it without a swell. It is a little difficult to tell, but he uses the expression "flat calm." Lightoller does in the first instance - it is his expression.

The Commissioner:
And the Captain's expression.

The Attorney-General:
Yes; as I said to my friend, Sir Robert Finlay, this morning, you observe that Sir Ernest Shackleton, who, at any rate, is a seaman, when he is speaking of a flat calm means what I suggest it does mean. There is all the difference in the world - at least I suggest it - between speaking of a calm and a flat calm. However, I do not want to lay too much stress upon the meaning of a particular phrase that is used in connection with it; all I want to show is that when he is speaking of a flat calm he must have in his mind that at least there must have been practically no movement although there might have been the slightest swell. That, I think, is the highest it can be put. And if there had been this very slight swell - I will concede in favour of Mr. Lightoller's proposition - that when he is speaking of a flat calm he means only with a slight swell - that would not have given any ripple upon the base of the berg upon which he would be entitled to rely as indicating to him at some distance ahead the presence of an iceberg.

That really exhausts what I desire to add upon that subject, and I will now address myself to the other point to which it is desirable that I should call your Lordship's attention. So far we have been dealing with the vessel up to the time of the report of the iceberg and the striking of the iceberg. It is unnecessary that I should call your Lordship's attention in any detail - so it occurs to me, but, of course, I will take any course your Lordship thinks right - as to what happened from the report by the look-out men of iceberg ahead and the striking of three bells and the telephone message, and then what happens on board the ship with the order to Hichens, the quartermaster; it is unnecessary that I should go into detail upon that, because I am accepting literally the evidence as it was given, and that you may treat the two things - that is, the sighting by the look-out man of the iceberg and by the Officer in charge, Mr. Murdoch - as simultaneous. That is the fairest way, at any rate to Mr. Murdoch, to deal with it, that he saw it at the same time, and that immediately an order is given, "Hard-a-starboard," and if your Lordship will remember Mr. Moody's evidence, he said that she was hard-a-starboard, the helm right over, just as the impact took place.

One has to bear in mind, and I will only ask your Lordship to consider what all this means - that it has taken me pretty nearly three times as long to recapitulate this story as to what happened after the sighting of the iceberg as the actual occurrence took, as the actual time that elapsed between the sighting of the iceberg and the striking of the berg, which I say at most is 40 seconds.

What I mentioned just now is the evidence of what Hichens said that Moody had said. I said the evidence of Moody, but I did not mean that Moody had been called.

Now, my Lord, that brings us to consider what the effect of the collision was. Of course, we have gone into that with considerable minuteness, having regard to its importance; we have examined the plans with the model and in particular with that large plan. Now that we have got it indicated as we have, your Lordship can see there on the section where exactly the wounds were inflicted, and I do not propose, unless you think it desirable (I am quite prepared to do it with references in detail to the actual evidence upon it, with the pages.) to go into it.

Continued >