British Wreck Commissioner's Inquiry
Day 28
Final Arguments, cont.
The Commissioner:
Yes, that may be.
Mr. Scanlan:
And if there had been a training of the Officers and crews in the manning and handling and navigation of the lifeboats, it would have been possible to have launched and lowered lifeboats sufficient to have rescued every one on that ship. We are all glad to think that there was nothing in the nature of a panic on the "Titanic," but I think it would be blinding one's eyes to the real facts of the case if one were to accept the view that discipline, in any proper sense of the term, was observed after the accident in the filling and sending off of these boats.
The Commissioner:
Now I think what you must say - you will probably agree with me - is that the facts speak for themselves, and that the evidence of the Witnesses who nearly all say that there was no panic and plenty of discipline cannot be accepted in face of the facts.
Mr. Scanlan:
That is my contention, my Lord. Of course, you might have panic in one sense if there had been a rush of the passengers past the Officers to get into the boats; and the Witnesses from the crew, and from amongst the Officers, are quite justified probably in saying that there was no panic whatever in that sense, and that discipline was maintained in that way, and that the Officers were respected by the members of the crew and by the passengers. But in the sense of the Officers and the members of the crew realising the duty thrown upon them and the work they had to do in the circumstances of the disaster, I think I am justified in saying in that broad sense that there was a lamentable want of knowledge and want of discipline amongst the Officers.
The Commissioner:
I want to follow you, and I want to have it clear. All the boats, except possibly one collapsible boat, were launched?
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes.
The Commissioner:
Let us leave out the one collapsible boat. And they were launched well before the ship foundered?
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, my Lord.
The Commissioner:
So that, discipline or no discipline, the boats were got into the water?
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, my Lord.
The Commissioner:
All of them, except the one collapsible?
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes.
The Commissioner:
The only fault, therefore, which was of any consequence, if it was a fault, was that they did not get the people into the boats?
Mr. Scanlan:
That is it, my Lord.
The Commissioner:
They managed, discipline or no discipline, to get all the boats into the water.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes.
The Commissioner:
I leave out the one collapsible boat. What they did not do, for some reason, was to get the people into the boats.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, my Lord.
The Commissioner:
Now, have you thought about that?
Mr. Scanlan:
I have, my Lord. I have given a good deal of consideration to the suggestion that people would not go into the boats, and I daresay that at the beginning that was true; but I do think if, when the terrible seriousness of what had happened was recognised by those in charge of the ship, they had told the people plainly that the ship was doomed, and was sinking, and would sink in a very short time, I think there would have been no indisposition to get into the boats.
There is a reference in Mr. Ismay's evidence, which I accept, to the fact that up to the time he left the "Titanic" he was not told by the Chief Engineer [Joseph Bell] or the Captain [Edward Smith] or anybody else, that the ship would certainly sink. He was told that the condition of the ship was dangerous, and I think he was told, in one part of his evidence, that the engineers hoped that by working the pumps they would be able to keep the "Titanic" afloat.
The Commissioner:
Have you looked at the Marconigram which says "sinking"? I will tell you which it is. It may be taken as showing that they, at all events, realised the condition then.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, my Lord.
The Attorney-General:
It is at the top of page 7, I think your Lordship means - "Titanic" to "Olympic."
The Commissioner:
Yes. "We are in collision with berg. Sinking. Head down." Now that is 1.10 a.m. ship's time. Now I think probably that message was sent from the Marconi room upon information given by the Captain to the Marconi operator.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, my Lord.
The Commissioner:
So that it was realised apparently at that time.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes.
The Commissioner:
That is an hour and ten minutes before the vessel went down.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, but there is no evidence, so far as I know, to the effect that when the seriousness of the catastrophe was realised, the passengers were apprised of the seriousness of their position.
The Commissioner:
Just think about that; let us see. They began, I think, to uncover the boats very soon after twelve o'clock, did they not?
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, my Lord.
The Commissioner:
That is within about a short half hour of the striking?
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, from 11.40.
The Commissioner:
Large numbers of people were then coming on deck.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes.
The Commissioner:
Does not that show this, that there was the very clearest notification of danger? People do not uncover lifeboats, you know, and begin to lower them, until there is danger.
Mr. Scanlan:
I thought I should indicate this to your Lordship as one explanation that has appeared to me. I think they would not have had any difficulty in getting the passengers; I do not think that any passengers would have held back, who knew that this was a last chance - if they were told, upon a boat going away, "If you do not go into it you will go down with the ship in half-an-hour." That would be a crude way of doing it.
The Commissioner:
I doubt whether they knew when they first began to uncover the boats that the ship would go down. They knew at ten minutes past one when the Marconigram was sent off.
Mr. Scanlan:
At all events, I do not think that can be put forward as an explanation why the boats were not filled to their full capacity. Two explanations suggest themselves to me. There was an idea in the mind of the Captain and in the mind of Mr. Lightoller as appears from the evidence of Mr. Lightoller at page 316, Questions 13953 and 13958. Shall I read those, my Lord, or just refer to them?
The Commissioner:
Just wait a minute. There is a telegram sent from the ship at 12.26. It is on the top of page 5, the second telegram, and it leaves the "Titanic" at 12.26 a.m. "Require immediate assistance. We have collision with iceberg. Sinking. Can hear nothing for noise of steam." That makes the notification of the sinking three-quarters of an hour before.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, my Lord. What that shows is that the responsible people, the Officers, knew that this message presumably was sent by the Captain's orders.
The Commissioner:
I want you to tell me your view. Do you think the Officers ought to have announced in some sort of way to the passengers that the ship was sinking?
Mr. Scanlan:
Well, I do, my Lord. I think the stewards -
The Commissioner:
I cannot imagine myself any more likely way to defeat the object that they had in view.
Mr. Scanlan:
I do admit that the situation then was a difficult one, and a delicate one, but at all events the stewards should have been instructed by the Officers to make it quite clear to any passengers who were holding back that if they did hold back they did so at their peril, and to let them know as quietly as might be the serious condition in which affairs were then. They might have even been forced into the boats, the women. In one department a large number of the women were not saved, and it would probably be the duty of the stewards, if discipline were rigorously carried out, to have put those people into the boats.
The Commissioner:
To have done what?
Mr. Scanlan:
To have put those people into the boats. I say the women, my Lord, who were held back by fear, should have been forcibly put into the boats.
The Commissioner:
I cannot imagine anything more alarming than for stewards to be dragging women by force; it would be a most terrifying thing.
Mr. Scanlan:
It is very alarming, my Lord, but it is not quite so terrible as being left behind on a ship that is doomed.
The Commissioner:
But, as you said just now, and you were quite right, it was a very difficult and delicate duty to perform.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, my Lord.
The Commissioner:
You must not frighten the people too much, because if you do, you may have panic.
Mr. Scanlan:
I agree, my Lord.
The Commissioner:
And yet, you must get them into the boats.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, my Lord.
The Commissioner:
You have to reconcile those two things.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, my Lord. I think probably something more might have been done. It is difficult, it is impossible, for me to say how much more might have been done; but this has occurred to me now as one explanation, and which I have put before your Lordship.
There is another matter. We had it in the evidence of a number of Witnesses that certain of the Officers did not know the carrying capacity of the boats, and that certain of the Officers entertained doubts as to the strength of the falls. It is true that the boats were new. I believe the boats were sound; I believe the falls were sound, but I think reading together the evidence of a number of Witnesses, Hogg, Boxhall, Symons, Hendrickson and Crawford, this is apparent.
The Commissioner:
I agree with you that there is evidence of that kind. That, you know, does not account for some of the boats going away with only a dozen people in them.
Mr. Scanlan:
No, my Lord, it does not. Then there is the evidence of Mr. Lightoller at page 316 with reference to this. It is where he lowered the boat with 40 people in it; it is Question 13953.
The Commissioner:
There is 13971, "You put as many into No. 4 boat as you thought safe? - (A.) Yes. (Q.) That was about 40. We know some of the boats carried considerably more than 40. - (A.) 65." I think I am examining. I apparently took a large slice of examination here: "Would the man in the boat to whom you had said, 'That boat is full; lower her,' know that she was capable of taking more when she became waterborne? - (A.) Yes, my Lord. (Q.) They would know? - (A.) They would know." Do you see those questions, Mr. Scanlan? How do you account for some of these boats going away with only twelve people in them?
Mr. Scanlan:
I am going to comment upon that, my Lord.
The Commissioner:
It cannot have been want of discipline.
Mr. Scanlan:
I was going to say this: I have put before your Lordship this consideration that the Officers did not know the carrying capacity of the boats or the strength of the falls.
The Commissioner:
That would not account for only 12.
Mr. Scanlan:
Very well. There is another consideration which I think is relevant to this branch of the Enquiry, and that is that there was a suggestion that when the boats were lowered they should be brought along when they became waterborne -
The Commissioner:
Below a gangway door?
Mr. Scanlan:
Below a gangway, and the passengers might be let down from the gangways. I understand there were two gangway doors, on each side of the ship, on the starboard and on the port.
The Commissioner:
Yes.
Mr. Scanlan:
Your Lordship will find this in the evidence of Mr. Lightoller on page 316 at Question 13957. "(The Commissioner.) You had ordered the gangway to be lowered, as I understand? - (A.) What gangway, my Lord? (Q.) The gangway in the forward part of the ship? - (A.) I had ordered the doors to be opened. (Q.) Well, that is what I mean."
The Commissioner:
If I said the forward part of the ship, I made a mistake. I think it was in the afterpart of the ship.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, my Lord, but they had those doors in point of fact both forward and aft. There were two sets of gangway doors. I think that is clear from the evidence. "You had ordered the gangway doors to be opened? - (A.) Yes. (Q.) And the gangway to be lowered from that point? - (A.) If there were sufficient time. We had a companion ladder." Then at Question 13961, "I do not see what is the use of the door if you do not lower the gangway? - (A.) We should probably lower the rope ladder; that was our idea. (Q.) That is the same thing as a gangway. You would provide some sort of communication between the opening of the door and the boat in the water below? - (A.) Exactly. (Q.) Whether it was a gangway or a rope ladder, it does not matter. You had ordered this door to be opened? - (A.) Yes. (Q.) There was no use having that open unless there was some sort of gangway? - (A.) No."
There is a good deal of further evidence as to that, my Lord. We have from Mr. Wilding, speaking of the construction of the ship, that in her construction special attention was directed to the possibility, if the lifeboats had to be used, of having the passengers lowered through those gangway doors. I will refer your Lordship to page 522 of Mr. Wilding's evidence. Almost at the top of the page your Lordship sees: "(The Commissioner.) The suggestion, I understand, was that those side doors might have been utilised for the purpose of getting passengers into the boats? (Mr. Rowlatt.) Had they all gangways? - (A.) They can be used without gangways."
The Commissioner:
I do not understand that. The doors were high up above the waterline. You could not step out into the boats, you know.
Mr. Scanlan:
No, you could not possibly, my Lord.
The Commissioner:
They would want either a companion ladder, or rope ladder, or something of the kind.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes. Just at the foot of that page it is explained lucidly by Mr. Wilding the provision which they did make. At Question 20476, your Lordship says "Directions by the Captain that these side doors should be opened, and, as I understood, it was suggested in the examination of the Witness by, I think, Mr. Scanlan (possibly by Mr. Edwards, I do not know.), that if they had been open, people who were either on that deck or could have been brought to that deck, could then have been put into the half-filled boats, and so more lives would have been saved. Now what have you to say to that? - (A.) The door that would most likely be used was this" - he pointed to the model. He means aft.
The Commissioner:
He pointed about to where the police Officer is standing now.
Mr. Scanlan:
Further aft than that, my Lord, [20476] "that door, at which there is an accommodation ladder; that is, a portable sloping ladder is provided just inside the ship opposite this door, which can be slipped on either side, and the order would probably be intended to apply to that door. (The Commissioner.) There is a corresponding door on the other side of the ship? - (A.) There is a door on each side, with a broad passage leading through from one door to the other. If this accommodation ladder was put in position from one of these doors it would be very easy for anyone, even ladies and children, to go down the accommodation ladder to get into the boats in smooth water, which we understand prevailed. There would be no difficulty once the accommodation ladder was rigged, which would be a matter of perhaps half-an-hour, to use it in that way. (Q.) But we have no evidence at all, as far as I know, that anybody from the ship got into a boat from that doorway? - (A.) I have heard none, my Lord."
The Commissioner:
I do not think we even know whether the door was opened. Orders were given to open it.
Mr. Scanlan:
Orders were given, and I think there is some evidence of the door being opened.
Sir Robert Finlay:
I do not think so.
Mr. Scanlan:
I had asked some questions previously on that. There is evidence of Mr. Boxhall at page 337 as to that method of getting the people away from the ship.
The Commissioner:
This is not a method contemplated of getting people into boats at all, is it?
Mr. Scanlan:
I think it is, my Lord, yes.
The Commissioner:
To lower the boats into the water and then fill them by means of a rope ladder or something of that sort?
Mr. Scanlan:
Or this companion ladder. It is an adjustable ladder which was specially provided for the purpose, Mr. Lightoller says that was his intention.
The Commissioner:
It is the way you get on board the ship.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, my Lord. When I was visiting with my learned friends the "Olympic" at Southampton, this was pointed out to me as a recognised way for using the boats and getting people into them. Boxhall says at Question 15472 on page 358, "Was any suggestion made of going back? - (A.) There was a suggestion made. I spoke about going back to the sailorman that was in the boat - that was whilst I was pulling round the stern - about going back to the ship, and then I decided that it was very unwise to have attempted it. So we pulled away, and then we did not pull back at all. (The Commissioner.) What did you intend to go back to the ship for? - (A.) I intended to go back to try and obey orders that I heard given through the megaphone. (Q.) Was that to stand by the gangway door, or what? - (A.) I do not know whether it was to stand by the gangway door; I do not remember any gangway doors being open."
The Commissioner:
That is not to the point.
Mr. Scanlan:
It is dealing with that point, my Lord. Your Lordship remembers the Witness, I think it is Crawford, who said that as he understood his orders from the Captain, they were to take the load of people he had off to that ship, pointing to a light, and then to come back for more. What appears to me, my Lord, is that there was a confused idea in the minds of the Captain and Officers that those doors might be used. Of course, the ship was new and the crew were new to the ship, and even this method of filling the boats with passengers does not seem to have been understood.
The Commissioner:
It was not adopted.
Mr. Scanlan:
It was not adopted, but I think it was meant to be adopted, because you have from Mr. Lightoller's evidence that he gave directions to have the door opened, and he told your Lordship the reason.
The Commissioner:
I can imagine that many of the women would have preferred going down steps to get into a boat rather than being swung out.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, my Lord.
The Commissioner:
Than being swung out 90 feet above the water and dropped down by means of the falls.
Mr. Scanlan:
I think it can be conceded that it would have been, in the circumstances of that night, a calm night, a most desirable way to have adopted. The only point I am trying to make now on this is that it is evident that the Officers did not know properly that this was a means, and that there was no decision come to, and communicated from one to another for the adoption of those means; because had it been adopted, I think quite a number of people who were left behind might have been got in, especially in the earlier stages.
In my examination of Mr. Lightoller, at page 323, I asked this question at Question 14228: "Had you understood between you and the Captain that this was one way of filling the lifeboats in the event of the lifeboats being required? - (A.) I had not discussed the matter with the Captain. (Q.) How was it that it occurred to you and to the Captain at the same time? - (A.) I do not know that it occurred at the same time. (Q.) But it did occur to both of you? - (A.) It came to both our minds, and naturally anyone familiar with the ship, any seaman, anyone attached to the ship, would know at once that was the best means of putting the people into the boats - by the gangway doors." I think it of importance to indicate this as one explanation for the lifeboats not being filled.
The Commissioner:
It does not account for one or more boats going away with only 12 people.
Mr. Scanlan:
No, it does not. I do not think there would have been any danger in lowering a boat with more than 10 or more than 12, or more than 20. The only boat that had 12 in it was this No. 1 boat.
The Commissioner:
Yes, and I am reminded that she was told to stand by the steamer.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, my Lord. They say that there were no other people there at the time, but she was to stand by.
The Commissioner:
How many people were there in the boat that Sir Cosmo Duff-Gordon went away in?
Mr. Scanlan:
Twelve.
The Commissioner:
That is the one.
Mr. Scanlan:
That is the same boat; 12 people - five passengers, and seven of the crew. I was pointing out this on the question of discipline. In the first place, it was not properly known and understood that this was a means of filling the boats, and there were no concerted means adopted between the Officers and the crew to carry out this method of loading. There was an ignorance on the part of the Officers as to the carrying capacity of the boats and the strength of the falls. Then, my Lord, we have this evidence from one of the Officers, Harold Godfrey Lowe, on page 346, [15804] "What was the boat to which you belonged? - (A.) I do not know."
The Commissioner:
Yes, he did not know, but whose fault was it that he did not know?
Mr. Scanlan:
I think that the fault is a somewhat wide one. There is a general want of discipline. Of course, there is a great want of drilling.
The Commissioner:
That is another matter.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes. You certainly had it that this man did not know his boat. I offer it as an explanation. If there had been discipline, if there had been a proper system of boat drills, and if through the years of their service with this Company and with other Companies more importance had been attached to boat drills, then I think the men would have been more useful in this emergency. On the question of the importance of having boat drills, I refer your Lordship to Captain Clarke at page 678, Question 24109, "Was it your duty to see whether all the lifeboats on the "Titanic" were equipped in accordance with the provisions of the Rules and Regulations made by the Board of Trade under the Merchant Shipping Acts? - (A.) That had already been done at Belfast. (Q.) It did not fall to your duty? - (A.) No, it did not fall to me. (Q.) Have you any idea as to what would be an efficient method of drilling crews to man lifeboats in case of accident? - (A.) Yes; I think that all hands that form the crew should be exercised in handling the ship's boats, both firemen and stewards. (Q.) I take it that up to the time of the 'Titanic' disaster that had not been the practice? - (A.) Not in the White Star Line." That is sufficient to indicate to your Lordship this view, and if you take the evidence of the Principal Professional Officer, as he is called, at the Board of Trade, Captain Young, he says at page 640, Question 23188, "I have Witnessed in the course of my duties as an Emigration Officer methods of putting out boats which were a disgrace to the service; and during the time that I was carrying out my emigration duties I did the best I could to remedy that defect. I was imbued with the knowledge that since that period when I was an Emigration Officer, things have not materially improved in the merchant service with regard to the training of deckhands. I may as well say at once that it is not the fault of those deckhands themselves; it is simply due to circumstances, the lack of opportunity, the lack of time in the hustle of the passenger service of the present day, which precludes those men from getting the training that they ought to have."
Mr. Laing:
Then the next question.
The Commissioner:
Yes, the next Question.
Mr. Scanlan:
"Do you mean the ships do not remain in port enough? - (A.) That is the reason, my Lord. There are not sufficient facilities for the exercise of the deckhands in the boats; there are in some ports but not in others." That sufficiently indicates it. I am anxious not to detain your Lordship by reading much of the evidence, but perhaps that and his answers to me, if I generally direct your Lordship to them, on the next page 641, will establish sufficiently the point I am now trying to make. He gives me his opinion that it is very desirable to have boat drills, and to have expensive boat drills, so as to practise a large number of the crew, and with a view, if possible, to give an opportunity of boat practice, not to 10 or 12 deckhands, selected at the port, as they were in the case of the "Titanic," but to all the different men of the different branches of the crew who would be called upon in the event of an emergency to go to the boats to help man them and rescue the passengers.
The Commissioner:
One has to think about these big vessels. Stewards are expected to serve at these boats, are not they?
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes.
The Commissioner:
And firemen?
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes.
The Commissioner:
And the deckhands?
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes, my Lord.
The Commissioner:
No others, I think, are there?
Mr. Scanlan:
Well, my friend, Mr. Roche, suggested that it would be well for the engineers whom he represents - the engineers -
The Commissioner:
I do not know. That would amount to some hundreds.
Mr. Scanlan:
Yes.
The Commissioner:
I think there were 300 stewards on board this vessel?
Continued >
){kind=link}