British Wreck Commissioner's Inquiry
Day 27
[Counsel Present - Witnesses]
The Attorney-General:
My Lord, I have to be away a little later and as the evidence will conclude this morning, there are one or two matters to which I would wish to direct attention. First, I would ask your Lordship to adjourn from the conclusion of the evidence until Friday morning. On Friday morning we expect to have the Captain of the "Carpathia" here, and his evidence will then close all the evidence to be put before you. It might be that he would not be available till the afternoon. As his evidence cannot affect any of my friends - as it cannot affect the interests with which they are particularly concerned - I would suggest, and I think it meets with their approval, that they should proceed with their addresses to your Lordship on Friday, notwithstanding that he may not be available at once, so that we may not lose time; as soon as he does arrive I will call him. His evidence in the main affects the address which I should have to make to your Lordship principally, because I have to deal with all the questions, but it does not affect anybody else, at any rate, very materially.
Then your Lordship was good enough yesterday to refer to a suggestion which had been made to you about a contrivance for the application of compressed air to a breach of the ship's side; and your Lordship asked us whether we had considered it. We have not in fact gone into it. We have made some little Enquiry into it, only such Enquiry as could be made from yesterday morning. What I suggest to your Lordship, subject to its meeting with your approval, is that this is a matter which should be referred also to the bulkheads Committee when they are dealing with questions affecting the sinkability of ships, and that we should draw their attention to the suggestion which your Lordship has made, and ask them to consider it amongst their experts with other questions which are before them. I think any other plan would involve our calling a good deal of evidence before your Lordship on a subject into which we have not even yet enquired, and it would mean also that if we once proceeded upon that we should have to enquire into further suggestions that have been made. I think that that would be contravening the ruling which your Lordship gave just before the adjournment at Whitsuntide. If your Lordship approves, that is the course we propose to take with regard to that.
The Commissioner:
Yes.
The Attorney-General:
If your Lordship pleases.
Sir Robert Finlay:
I entirely assent. I have gone a little into this matter with Mr. Wilding, and the result of what I have had from him on the subject is that I think the course which the Attorney-General proposes would be the right one.
Mr. Edwards:
There is one point, My Lord. When Mr. Wilding was being examined, and the question came up as to longitudinal bulkheads, the learned Attorney-General said that they were going to call somebody from the Admiralty. I am not certain whether in view of what your Lordship indicated as to bulkhead construction going to the Committee, that intention now is abandoned.
The Attorney-General:
My Lord, I will tell my friend at once. There are two considerations which affected me in not calling evidence from the Admiralty. The one, and I think the paramount consideration, is that on the whole it is not considered advisable that the Admiralty should give evidence upon this subject in a public Court. It must be obvious that it is not advisable. And, Moreover, if I may say so, your Lordship has the advantage of the assistance of those who do know what takes place, and it becomes therefore unnecessary to call that particular evidence, and in the public interest, I came to the conclusion that I could not press it.
The Commissioner:
Then there is a further consideration.
The Attorney-General:
Yes, your Lordship gave a ruling which decided us that in any event it would only be taking up time uselessly upon this point inasmuch as your Lordship is only going to make a general recommendation with regard to this matter, and not a specific one; and consequently I thought we ought not even to attempt to take up further time with discussions of that kind. It would involve my calling evidence as to other systems as well.
The Commissioner:
Not only that, but I think the considerations which guide the Admiralty are probably quite different from those which guide the constructors of merchant vessels.
The Attorney-General:
Quite, My Lord.
Mr. Edwards:
May I say at once that that is an explanation entirely satisfactory.
The Attorney-General:
Very well. Then there are one or two matters I should like to deal with. There is the table I referred to.
The Table was handed in, and is as follows: -
SUBMITTED.
by The Attorney-General
Table - Boat accommodation for German Steamers.
The Commissioner:
Mr. Edwards, Mr. Scanlan and the other gentlemen - what I call the other side - should have copies of this document.
The Attorney-General:
Yes, My Lord, I want to call attention to this document which is agreed between us. It is the table of boat accommodation on German passenger steamers. I referred earlier to it. I told you we had agreed to it, and I will call your attention to specific figures in it. Your Lordship will see first of all it contains the names of six of the large German liners, with their gross tonnage, with the maximum number of passengers they are allowed to carry; then the crew they carry, giving the total number of persons they can carry on board each of these vessels.
Then, My Lord, there are two further columns. One shows the number of boats and the persons who could be accommodated in those boats for the period up to the 31st March, 1912, and gives also in the last column of that table in italics the percentage of persons who could be accommodated. The next column is for the same vessels on the 29th May, 1912, when according to the German requirements there have been very important additions made, so that we may see now what the position was on the 29th May, 1912, with regard to these same vessels, the number of boats and the percentage of boatage accommodation for the persons on the vessels. The point of it, as you will see, is that, according to the requirements before the 31st March, 1912, the percentage is as low as 48 percent boatage accommodation for persons carried. That is in the "Berlin."
The Commissioner:
And that is the smallest vessel.
The Attorney-General:
And it is the smallest vessel, 17,324 tons, carrying 3,092 persons; 24 boats, with boatage accommodation for 1,489, giving a percentage of 48 percent. The increase after the "Titanic" disaster, on the 29th May, 1912, was from 24 to 39 boats, cubic capacity in feet from 13,885 to 20,295; persons accommodated 1,489 in March, to 2,278 in May, and the percentage, therefore, of persons accommodated in May of 1912 was 74 percent, as against 48 percent before the "Titanic" disaster. That is the best instance. I need not go through them all. I take that as a typical instance and as the best, because it had the lowest percentage of boatage accommodation before march, and there has been a large increase. Your Lordship will observe from that that even now, at the present date, after the "Titanic" disaster, the total number of persons accommodated, according to the German requirements, is 74 percent, only of those on board.
The Commissioner:
No; 74 percent, of those that are permitted by law to be carried.
The Attorney-General:
I think I will take it at that; yes. I think it is because of the asterisk there to it.
The Commissioner:
I notice, Mr. Attorney, that the boat accommodation appears by these figures to be regulated as it is with us, according to tonnage.
The Attorney-General:
Yes.
The Commissioner:
And not according to numbers carried.
The Attorney-General:
Yes, that would be in accordance with the requirements to which I called attention earlier.
Sir Robert Finlay:
I do not know whether the Attorney-General can supply it, probably not, but with regard to this that was done in May, after the "Titanic" disaster, do the figures represent what was voluntarily done, as, for instance, in the case of this country in the "Olympic" - the increase in the number of boats; or does it represent what is done under any Government requirement; if so, I think it would be desirable to have the requirement.
The Attorney-General:
I understand from the Board of Trade, Sir Robert, that, in fact, the increase was voluntary. There are no new requirements; but in consequence of the disaster, as was done in this country, all liners did certainly make very great efforts to supply greater boatage accommodation.
Sir Robert Finlay:
There is one other observation, and only one, I wish to make about this; it does not show the number of boats under davits.
The Attorney-General:
No, it does not do that.
The Commissioner:
I was told that since the "Titanic" disaster there had been some alteration in the law in the United States by which every passenger ship was required to carry sufficient boat accommodation for everybody on board.
The Attorney-General:
I thought it was a recommendation, My Lord, but not a law yet.
The Commissioner:
I did not understand that, but certainly within the last few days I have seen in the newspapers that that recommendation had been approved by the authorities in New York, and might be regarded now as one of their rules and Regulations corresponding with the Rules and Regulations of our Board of Trade.
The Attorney-General:
I did not know whether it had got to the effective stage, but in any event it had, I think, so far as to indicate what would be done.
The Commissioner:
But, then, I do not know what that means, whether it is a Rule applying to ships flying the United States flag or whether it is a Rule which would preclude any foreign vessel entering a United States port unless it complied with those Rules.
The Attorney-General:
There is the question of reciprocity.
Mr. Scanlan:
I asked a question with regard to this.
The Commissioner:
I think it was you who drew my attention to it.
Mr. Scanlan:
I asked a question on the Rules of the Department of Commerce and Labour of America, and I would like your Lordship to look at this. These are Rules actually in force, I am given to understand. This was issued on the 27th April, 1912.
The Commissioner:
That is what I was referring to; it is something later.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, it is later - the 27th April.
The Commissioner:
When was the date of the American Report? It was last month?
The Attorney-General:
I should like to see that document which Mr. Scanlan has.
The Commissioner:
What is that pamphlet you have in your hand, Mr. Scanlan?
Mr. Scanlan: It is the official American Regulations, My Lord. (The same were handed to the Attorney-General.)
The Attorney-General:
I see this is "General Rules and Regulations prescribed by the board of Supervising Inspectors as amended January, 1912, and as further amended by action of the Executive Committee of the board of Supervising Inspectors, April 26th, 1912." They are the requirements as amended.
The Commissioner:
What date is that last?
The Attorney-General:
April 26.
The Commissioner:
That is the document Mr. Scanlan referred to. I understood from what I read in a newspaper - perhaps I ought not to refer to newspapers - that it had recently been made a law in the United States. I do not know how they make these things laws, whether they are laws by being regulations, or whether there has to be some legislation about them.
The Attorney-General:
I should gather from this that the Executive Committee has the power of amending the Rules.
The Commissioner:
I fancy so.
The Attorney-General:
And from this it must be so.
Mr. Scanlan:
It corresponds somewhat to the Board of Trade.
The Attorney-General:
I think so.
Mr. Scanlan:
It is the same as the Board of Trade here.
The Commissioner:
That is to say, they can make Rules which have the effect of laws.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, My Lord. Your Lordship asked for the date of the American Report, and it is the 28th of May of this year.
The Commissioner:
I think there was something that took place after that date.
Mr. Scanlan:
I am not in possession of any information as to that.
The Commissioner:
Have you heard of any, Sir Robert?
Sir Robert Finlay:
I take it that the regulation of the 27th of April would not apply to vessels flying the British flag.
The Commissioner:
That is what I want to know.
The Attorney-General:
I am not so sure about that.
The Commissioner:
Are they regulations which apply merely to American ships.
Sir Robert Finlay:
It would seem very remarkable if any Executive Committee had any authority to make regulations which would affect foreign vessels.
The Commissioner:
What occurred to me was this: it might make a regulation that no ship which did not meet their requirements should enter their ports.
Sir Robert Finlay:
No doubt it might, but my observation is that it is very remarkable if such a power as that were given to an Executive Committee.
The Attorney-General:
We know how it is. Under a reciprocal agreement between the United States and this country, to which reference has been made, the United States is satisfied with the compliance of British vessels with the requirements of the Board of Trade, and we do the same with regard to the United States in this country. Those are reciprocal agreements.
The Commissioner:
And those agreements, I should think could only be altered by a treaty.
Sir Robert Finlay:
The reciprocal treaty is still in force.
The Attorney-General:
This Executive Committee cannot alter the reciprocal agreement between the United States and this country.
The Commissioner:
I think it is cleared up. I do not think we need discuss it any further.
Mr. Scanlan:
I may say, with reference to the American Report, this matter is referred to at page 18: "By statute the United States accepts reciprocally the inspection certificates of foreign countries having inspection laws approximating those of the United States. Unless there is early revision of inspection laws of foreign countries along the lines laid down hereinafter, the Committee deems it proper that such reciprocal arrangements be terminated, and that no vessel shall be licensed to carry passengers from ports of the United States until all regulations and requirements of the laws of the United States have been fully complied with."
Sir Robert Finlay:
That makes it clear that it is as your Lordship said; it is a recommendation for a modification.
The Commissioner:
And now, Sir Robert, you have made an observation with regard to this Table put in this morning, that it does not distinguish between boats carried under davits and collapsible boats.
Sir Robert Finlay:
It does not; and I take it it would be impossible, at all events at present, to get the information.
The Attorney-General:
Yes.
The Commissioner:
There is another matter to which I am very anxious your attention should be directed. I mentioned it some days ago. I should like to know what liners were traversing this region on or about the date of the 14th April, and I should like to know at what speeds they were traversing the region. I mentioned it some time ago, and my reason is this: I shall have to consider at the proper time whether Captain Smith was guilty of negligence or merely guilty of an error of judgment, and I think my opinion on that matter will be greatly influenced by the conduct of others, other experienced navigators traversing the same district at the same time.
The Attorney-General:
Of course, you must add something to that, My Lord, Must you not, to make the comparison - and receiving ice reports of a similar character?
The Commissioner:
Oh, of course. I assume - I do not know it - that liners traversing this region on or about that day would receive similar advices to those that were received by the "Titanic."
The Attorney-General:
Yes, enquiries have been made. I was just going to refer to it when your Lordship mentioned it. I have the document in my hand which enabled us to make some answer to it, but I am afraid it is by no means complete. Several lines have not answered at all.
The Commissioner:
I daresay they would not.
The Attorney-General:
I think there is some objection, or, at any rate, I can quite conceive there is some objection, to giving their sailing instructions and stating what happened. But I have it from some. The lines from which I have answers I am going to call your Lordship's attention to now.
The Commissioner:
Have you any German boats?
The Attorney-General:
No; we wrote to them, but we have had no reply to both the Hamburg-Amerika and the Norddeutscher.
The Commissioner:
I should like to have copies of the letters, because the absence of an answer to the letters would have a significance in my mind.
The Attorney-General:
I will read your Lordship the letter that was sent round to all the various Liner Companies, including the German and one of the french. It is on the 6th June, 1912, from the Board of Trade: "With reference to the Enquiry now proceeding into the 'Titanic' disaster, I am directed by the Board of Trade to inform you that they have been requested by the Court to obtain information from the leading British (and German) shipping companies engaged in the North Atlantic passenger trade respecting (a.) the westward-bound vessels which received on or about the 15th of April wireless or other messages similar to those received by the 'Titanic' regarding the presence of field ice or icebergs in their vicinity."
The Commissioner:
Why not the 14th?
The Attorney-General:
I do not know why they said the 15th, but obviously it would cover it, and the answers show it does. "(b.) The speed at which they were travelling, and (c.) the precautions, such as alteration of course, or diminution of speed, adopted by the master of the ship in order to avoid danger."
The Commissioner:
If these gentlemen have omitted, or do not desire to answer for some reason (I can understand it, I am not in any way blaming them), the information can be obtained in another way, not so satisfactorily, it is true, but it can be obtained in this way - by ascertaining when these vessels left their ports of departure and when they arrived.
The Attorney-General:
We can do that, but I do not know whether your Lordship would think that would give you the information.
The Commissioner:
Well, if I found that American liners travelling through that region at this particular time kept their time, arrived at the ordinary time, I should draw the conclusion that they had not slowed down, at all events, for any length of time.
The Attorney-General:
Yes.
Sir Robert Finlay:
Of course, it might involve a good deal of investigation into each particular case.
The Commissioner:
Of course it would. It is very rough.
Sir Robert Finlay:
Your Lordship will recollect that in the case of the "Titanic" they had intended not to keep up their speed, but to arrive in the evening.
The Commissioner:
I know that; for the convenience of the passengers, I think it was.
Sir Robert Finlay:
Yes.
The Attorney-General:
In order to make it quite clear, I think when I said just now the German Lines have not answered, that is not quite accurate. They have answered, but they have not supplied us with the information. They have said that they will furnish the information as soon as it can be obtained.
The Commissioner:
Well, that is a very reasonable answer.
The Attorney-General:
Yes, I have not got the answer.
The Commissioner:
I daresay they have to wait until they can inspect the logs.
The Attorney-General:
Quite so; and the Norddeutscher also say they have to get their information from the head office at Bremen. At any rate, we shall have it according to the promise made, and as soon as it is obtained it can be supplied to your Lordship.
The Commissioner:
I am very glad they have taken up that position.
The Attorney-General:
We only wrote to the Hamburg-Amerika Line and the Norddeutscher Line, and they replied at once, saying they would furnish the information as soon as it could be obtained.
The Commissioner:
Have you, Mr. Scanlan, or Mr. Edwards, any information bearing upon this subject.
Mr. Scanlan:
I have not, My Lord.
Mr. Edwards:
I have not, My Lord.
The Commissioner:
Because when you come to address me I should like you to direct your attention to this question as to the blame that is to be fixed upon the Captain. I am very anxious not to fix blame upon a man who cannot be here, unless it is very clearly proved, and I want, therefore, to get out everything that can be reasonably regarded as explaining his conduct.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes.
The Attorney-General:
We have some information that will be laid before the Court from various lines - the Leyland, the anchor, the Canadian Pacific and the allan Line - information which we can, give you, and also from the Cunard.
Sir Robert Finlay:
I am afraid this will want a good deal of probing. I take only one case, the "Mauretania." We are told that on approaching ice regions she deviated to the southward - I am informed that she deviated to the southward, because she got a wireless message as to alteration of the track.
The Attorney-General:
I think that is highly probable.
The Commissioner:
But when did she get that?
The Attorney-General:
Only after the "Titanic" disaster.
The Commissioner:
It must have been after it.
The Attorney-General:
That is the explanation.
The Commissioner:
That would be of no importance whatever to my mind, Sir Robert. If it has any significance it is rather in your favour than otherwise, but I do not think it has any real significance.
Sir Robert Finlay:
It very much qualifies it.
The Commissioner:
I regard you as representing the Captain.
Sir Robert Finlay:
Yes, I do, My Lord.
The Commissioner:
Very well. I regard you as representing the Captain, and if you object to this, what I call an irregularity, then I will not do it.
Sir Robert Finlay:
I should ask before anything of the kind is admitted, we should have the opportunity of examining the letters upon which this table is based, and seeing what these letters show on their face.
The Attorney-General:
You have them.
Sir Robert Finlay:
And we must also see the logbooks. I do not think this is satisfactory. As things at present stand I object to it.
The Attorney-General:
I do not mind what happens to it.
The Commissioner:
If Sir Robert tells me he objects to it, it is not, in my opinion, evidence in the proper sense of the word, and if it is objected to I will not accept it.
Sir Robert Finlay:
We will assist the Court in every way in our power, but we must see the logbooks and we must see the correspondence.
The Attorney-General:
If that is to happen, if your Lordship thinks it is of importance that you should have them, we will take care it is put before you in regular form. I cannot do anything more. We have got it in accordance with the Court's desire. There is the evidence, or, at any rate, the information which we have got.
The Commissioner:
I will explain to you the significance which I think it has. If a number of experienced men who traverse the ocean, as Captain Smith did, are found to have been doing precisely what he did, it would be a very difficult thing for me to say that he was guilty of negligence. An error of judgment is a different thing altogether.
The Attorney-General:
I do not want to argue it now, but your Lordship has to take into account some other considerations. It may be, and sometimes is, the case - it is quite necessary to put this view - that lines that are running in competition run unnecessary risks.
The Commissioner:
Yes.
The Attorney-General:
And the question is whether in this case, although they have all done the same thing, it was still an unnecessary risk.
The Commissioner:
Yes.
The Attorney-General:
And a negligent act, in view of the freight they carried.
The Commissioner:
You mean the lives they carried.
The Attorney-General:
Certainly, the number of passengers.
The Commissioner:
You can imagine every man in the trade has been negligent for the last 20 years, but I should be much more disposed to say that a man who has followed the practice that has existed so long is guilty of an error of judgment.
The Attorney-General:
There are so many considerations to apply to this particular case.
Continued >
