British Wreck Commissioner's Inquiry

Day 3 - Continued

The Commissioner:
Are you again suggesting that you would have been heard in camera?

Mr. Clem Edwards:
I suggest that is so.

The Commissioner:
Then I tell you again as I have told you so before, you would not.

Mr. Clem Edwards:
Then the lesser grievances that I have as representing the sailors and the firemen would be merged in the greater grievance, that they would not be a party to an Inquiry that they thought vital, and I say no more upon that particular point.

Now I do suggest that apart altogether from those questions which by common consent it would be right, in the state in which we find ourselves at the present time, to rule out of public discussion - apart from that, I do suggest that there ought to have been evidence in this Inquiry as to how far, if it had been possible to get it, the immediate damage from the torpedo went, and secondly -

The Commissioner:
I have asked you before, and I will repeat the question: Do you suggest that such evidence exists?

Mr. Clem Edwards:
I do, my Lord.

The Commissioner:
Where is it?

Mr. Clem Edwards:
I should suggest that it exists among some officers and members of the crew.

The Commissioner:
Can you give us the name of a single officer or member of the crew or passenger who can assist you in that direction.

Mr. Clem Edwards:
No, my Lord, because we have not had access to these witnesses, nor have we had access to their proofs.

The Commissioner:
But you might have if you had chosen. You are a very rich Union, are you not?

Mr. Clem Edwards:
No, we are not.

The Commissioner:
You have got a good deal of money?

Mr. Clem Edwards:
No, we have not.

The Commissioner:
Have you no money?

Mr. Clem Edwards:
There is some, my Lord, but there are very grave responsibilities upon the Union.

The Commissioner:
You could have got at these witnesses quite well. You have given me the impression that you want to make a grievance.

Mr. Clem Edwards:
I tell you frankly I have no desire to make a grievance, but I do desire to place frankly before your Lordship what I consider to be a real grievance. We have a right to assume, in an Inquiry of this sort, that something like precedent would be followed, and one assumes that the questions would not have been drawn as they have been drawn for the purpose of this Inquiry by, I presume, the responsible officers of the Crown, without there had been some evidence.

The Solicitor-General:
What do you mean?

The Commissioner:
I will tell you this: Those questions are drawn up before any evidence is obtained at all.

The Solicitor-General:
This is a matter of some importance. My friend is evidently reflecting in some vague and unintelligible fashion, and perhaps he will explain his position a little more clearly.

The Commissioner:
Now try and get rid of your grievance and come to the point.

Mr. Clem Edwards:
I do not understand the observation of the learned Solicitor-General.

The Commissioner:
Go on with your case, but do try and divest yourself of these grievances which I do not believe you mean.

Mr. Clem Edwards:
I am not going to question the responsibility to my clients by protesting that there is no grievance when I think there is a very real grievance.

The Commissioner:
All these other people that have been called upon by me have exactly the same grievances, if they are grievances, and I have not heard a word from them about it.

Mr. Clem Edwards:
I am not my legal brother's keeper, so I can say nothing as to that, but we have had here no evidence admitted to show whether above and beyond the primary damage which was done by the torpedo there was secondary trouble caused through the question of the watertight doors or not.

The Commissioner:
You have cross-examined about it yourself, you know, men who were down in the engine room and men who could give you the information.

Mr. Clem Edwards:
That quite illustrates that. When I started to cross-examine the third engineer your Lordship pulled me up by saying that a third engineer was not a proper person to ask questions of that sort.

The Commissioner:
You have had others since then.

Mr. Clem Edwards:
Since I have had these questions handed to me Captain Turner has returned to the witness box, and with your Lordship's permission I asked Captain Turner certain questions, which resolved themselves into Captain Turner saying that he gave instructions to Captain Anderson to instruct the carpenters to take soundings and we could not get beyond that.

The Commissioner:
You did not expect Captain Anderson to be called did you?

Mr. Clem Edwards:
No, I did not. Of course I did not. With regard to the main point of the Inquiry, it is of course perfectly futile, and in view of the vital evidence not being before me it is perfectly impossible for me to address the Court with any advantage at all. I can only say this, that if the question of speed is a matter of importance, an important element of safety in relation to submarine warfare, if the question of keeping a straight course or zig-zagging is an important element of safety in relation to submarine warfare, then I should submit that upon the evidence as you have it here, apart from the question of Admiralty advice which we cannot go into, there is revealed a grave responsibility, both on the part of the owners and on the part of the captain of the ship, for the owners of a ship with a great danger anticipated for them to tie their hands to a captain in the manner of navigating by limiting - by giving him an instruction telling him that he should only have 19 boilers which will give a maximum speed of 21 knots, instead of having the 25 boilers fired, which when linked up would give a maximum speed of 24 to 25 knots, reveals a state of very grave culpability, I submit on the part of the owners.

The Commissioner:
Had it anything to do with this catastrophe?

Mr. Clem Edwards:
That I am unable to answer in the absence of the evidence which your Lordship took in camera and that is why I postulate it.

The Commissioner:
That is not true. You are making a statement which is not accurate. The evidence given in camera has got nothing to do with the question that I am putting to you now. If the speed and the power of getting up speed had been increased would it have made the least difference to this catastrophe, and if so tell me how, because I should like to consider it.

Mr. Clem Edwards:
There has not been evidence given here in public which shows one way or the other; that is to say, that at most all that can be done is to draw an inference from and to make a comment upon the evidence which has been given and if her speed is an important element of safety.

The Commissioner:
Now do not slip away from the point.

Mr. Clem Edwards:
I am not going to, my Lord; I am going to do it in my own way.

The Commissioner:
I am not going to let you, if I can help it. This torpedo suddenly came into the side of the "Lusitania”; it was not observed much more than a few seconds before it came; how would the speed of the vessel or the capacity for getting up speed have affected the catastrophe? That is what I want to know from you.

Mr. Clem Edwards:
It can only be an inference, and what I suggest is that this is the right inference to draw from the evidence that is already in public before your Lordship.

The Commissioner:
That is quite right.

Mr. Clem Edwards:
Captain Turner in answer to a question by me said "I kept as straight a course as I possibly could," That is one, "I was going at 18 knots." That is two. Now let us assume that there was a submarine on the watch; there could have been no difficulty for the observation officer in that submarine to get the speed at which the ship was travelling, no difficulty at all to place himself in a certain definite position in relation to the oncoming ship and knowing its line and knowing its distance, it can fire a torpedo at a comparatively short range, the likelihood of getting that steamer at 18 knots as compared with a greater speed; there is a likelihood - I simply put it in that way; that is to say, it is a balance of probabilities between the one speed and the other. So much for the moment for speed alone, Let us suppose that you have in combination with a speed a zig-zag course, and let us assume that for a certain distance the steamer runs one quarter of a mile to the north-east, then it swings over and it runs half a mile to the south-east, it swings back again and does 800 yards to the north-east and so on, it would be very, very difficult if not impossible for a submarine to estimate exactly what was going to be the distance on a particular one of the zig-zags; that is to say, a varying distance at each zig-zag would be confusing to the submarine. I therefore submit, that assuming the general principle that speed has something to do with safety and that zig-zag has something to do with safety, it is a perfectly fair inference from the evidence which has been given by Captain Turner that he was zig-zagging, and he was only going 18 knots an hour, to say that that was even on the evidence as you have it here, a grave contributory cause to this disaster, and if that be so, then any action on the part of the owners' limiting the discretionary powers of the captain, is in its turn a matter of grave culpability, I cannot say more than that.

The Commissioner:
All that I quite well understand, and what you are saying now appears to me to be the point. It is the grievance I do not like.

Mr. Clem Edwards:
I admitted, my Lord, that the grievance was continuing after we got to the speed of the ship, and that so far as the evidence goes here is really the main evidence with regard to which one does feel in a special and peculiar difficulty, that is to say, that the evidence that your Lordship has to deal with is evidence which is not at present before us, and upon which I am not therefore in a position to comment.

Mr. Marshall:
We are quite satisfied, my Lord, with the course of the Inquiry, and do not raise any objection whatever.

Mr. Macmaster:
My Lord, I have only a few observations to make and I will be able to make them in two moments. In the first place I have no grievance.

The Commissioner:
I am very glad to hear that.

Mr. Macmaster:
The fullest opportunity has been given here to cross-examine witnesses and to call witnesses and there has been no mention in any respect of any grievance in that connection. The second observation I wish to make is this. The hearing has been very expeditious; the evidence has been so recently taken that it is entirely fresh in your Lordship's memory and for that reason it is quite unnecessary, I think, to review it. Then the remaining question is the question of the responsibility which may have some bearing in respect of the public and in respect of private individuals. These may not be entirely before your Lordship at this time and may not be entirely precluded by the result of this Investigation, but, upon the whole, upon behalf of the clients whom I represent, I must say we are entirely satisfied.

The Commissioner:
Where is Mr. Cotter?

Mr. Clem Edwards:
He has gone to sea, my Lord.

Mr. Butler Aspinall:
I have been looking for him, my Lord, but he is missing. My Lord, I cannot say I have nothing to say but I have little to say, and I say so advisedly having regard to the evidence which has been put before your Lordship and those who sit with you.

My Lord, my duty is now to address you on behalf of my two clients, one the Cunard Company and the other the master, and in view of the fact that a good deal of the evidence which affects the conduct of the master has been given before your Lordship in private, unless your Lordship wishes me to address you with regard to his conduct, I do not propose to add more than I did have an opportunity of saying before your Lordship in camera.

The Commissioner:
I may desire you and the representative of the Board of Trade to address me upon the question of navigation - but not here.

Mr. Butler Aspinall:
I thought it was highly probable that that was the course your Lordship would adopt, and therefore I shall make it my business under those circumstances to severely dissociate myself from in any way dealing with the topic which were mentioned in your Lordship's private room. It therefore becomes my duty to ask your Lordship to consider, looking at the matter quite broadly, whether or not the Cunard Company have failed in the duty which they owe to the public, and my submission to your Lordship is that the answer to that should be in the negative. One has noticed that various representatives of passengers and others and also certain unions have taken a part, and a very proper part, in the elucidation of the facts, and after the evidence was closed all of them, with the exception of Mr. Clem Edwards, whom we are always delighted to hear, had nothing to say; in other words, apparently neither had they a grievance nor apparently had they a case.

Mr. Scanlan:
That is not admitted at all.

Mr. Butler Aspinall:
Then I withdraw it at once.

The Commissioner:
You need not trouble about Mr. Scanlan.

Mr. Butler Aspinall:
No, my Lord, he is a great friend of mine and it may well be that we may have the pleasure of meeting him in some other place, but at any rate they have seen fit not to trouble your Lordship for the moment with any evidence which otherwise we might have had the benefit of hearing. Mr. Clem Edwards has, I submit, not a grievance so much as a grumble to put before your Lordship, and he succeeded in putting it, but it is difficult for me as representing the interests of the Company to appreciate quite what the grumble amounts to. He is appearing here on behalf of the National Union of Sailors and Firemen, and what benefit either he or his clients would get -

The Commissioner:
Whom are you talking of now.

Mr. Butler Aspinall:
Mr. Clem Edwards.

The Commissioner:
I thought Mr. Clem Edwards represented the Engineers?

Mr. Clem Edwards:
The National Union of Sailors and Firemen.

Mr. Butler Aspinall:
I have been wondering what benefit he would get by succeeding in establishing that there was any dereliction of duty on the part of the Cunard Company or of the officers in charge of this vessel. However, perhaps I may pass that by.

Now, my Lord, has there been any dereliction of duty on the part of the Cunard Company? I submit it is established beyond all possible doubt that, in this case, the Cunard Company supplied the public with a seaworthy and a high class vessel and a vessel fitted and amply fitted

With life-saving appliances, and also that hey put her in the charge of a capable and efficient master, officers and crew, and did their best, as business people, so far as they reasonably could, to bring it home to the master that it was his duty to take all precautions and extra precautions to avoid the danger of submarine menace.

My Lord, I submit that if they have discharged those duties, they have done all that can be asked of them. It is beyond all doubt (you want no evidence of that) that the "Lusitania" was almost the last word, if I may so call her, in the great passenger steamers that cross the Atlantic. She was, as we have heard from the Board of Trade officials, amply fitted with life-saving appliances on the occasion when some three weeks before, I think it was, she left Liverpool, and we have the affirmative evidence of various officials whose duty it would be to attend to these matters who tell your Lordship that at the time there were ample life-saving appliances and everything was in good order and condition and ready to be used. We have the fact that after this vessel entered into the danger zone it was appreciated by the captain that the time had come for him to take extra precautions.

The Commissioner:
I have had no evidence as to when these lifeboats, as to which some complaints were made, were built. Will you ascertain for me, were they built for the ship or have they been built since.

Mr. Butler Aspinall:
My Lord, the general manager tells me that the boats which were on the ship at the time of this calamity were not the boats, certainly not all the boats, which had originally been supplied to the ship owing to various recommendations which have been made.

The Commissioner:
I suppose some of them were put on after the "Titanic."

Mr. Butler Aspinall:
Yes. The general manager says that many of the original boats would still have been on at the time of the casualty, a certain number were put on at a subsequent time, and those were either new or comparatively new boats. My Lord, so far as the equipment of this ship is concerned, I submit that it would be impossible for your Lordship upon the evidence to come to the conclusion that there had been anything wanting with regard to their efficiency or anything wanting with regard to their condition or anything wanting with regard to their readiness for use. They were swung out, and it was the business of one of the officials on board the ship to see that they were ready for use, and for the safety of the man's own skin, one may feel assured I submit that everything was done that could be done in order to make these boats efficient and ready for use on this occasion.

Now the next point that one has to consider is this: speaking on behalf of my client, did the captain, did the officers, and did the crew, although I only hold a brief for the master - did they do everything that could be expected of them after the ship had been struck by the torpedo?

My Lord, I submit that these men were not found wanting in this hour of need. We have it that the first consideration on the part of the officers and the master was the women and children. I shall deal shortly with the impressions - I advisedly use that word of Mr. Thomas. There is an abundance of evidence that that is what came first, not only on the part of the captain, not only on the part of the officers and crew, but very probably on the part of the male passengers - women and children first; and if there was some slight confusion can it be unexpected? There was no panic. Of course there was confusion, and Mr. Thomas has told u himself that apparently there was no practical confusion until the steerage passengers, to some extent, as it were, rushed the ship, but women and children came first, and if one may go almost to the end of this drama, this tragedy of the sea. What happened? As this great vessel goes down, where do we find the captain? Where would you expect to find him? On the bridge of his vessel. What is happening during the interval? The time is short; the vessel has a list which means, of course, that practically all the boats on the port side are put out of action. By some great good luck some of those boats did reach the water, and when they did reach the water, so far as we can find, they were damaged and they were useless for the purpose of saving life, but not only was the time short, and not only were half the boats put out of action, but In addition to that, the ship had this great list and she never lost her headway, and when one remembers the height from which these boats have got to be lowered into the water, and if in addition to that you have to deal with the difficulty when the boats were being lowered of the ship being in motion, I submit that extremely good work was done by these men in handling the boats as they did. There were mishaps with regard to the boats; of course there were; it is to be noticed that so far as we have been able to gather from the evidence, those mishaps mainly happened on the port side. Unfortunately the passengers, I have no doubt actuated by the best wish in the world, wishful to save the lives of others and their own, took charge of certain of the boats on the port side, and the result of it was that in their efforts to get those boats into the water, I submit it is fairly certain that those boats met with catastrophe, and other boats which reached the water as I said, in the process of reaching the water had been bumped against the side of the ship, and the result of it was that those boats when they got to the water were leaking, water got in, and the result of it was that the unhappy passengers and the occupants of the boats were thrown into the water.

My Lord, to justify what I am contending for, namely, that the master, officers, and crew behaved well on the occasion of this disaster, may I, by way of illustration, remind your Lordship of one little incident that happened? I call it little; it is the wrong epithet, that was the part that that young man played; his name was Leslie Morton, He was a boy aged 18, He was thrown into the water. He told us that after he got into the water, he with another man, I think his name was Parry, saw a boat with its cover on, probably one of these collapsible boats; he unzipped the cover and he and his companion got in and succeeded in saving some 50 lives, They put them in a smack, They then with the help of others returned to the wreck and saved more lives.

The Commissioner:
What was that boy's name?

Mr. Butler Aspinall:
That boy's name was Leslie Morton. He was a young lad who had been an apprentice - and this was his first voyage with the Cunard Company and I hope he will make many successful voyages in years to come - and at New York he was shipped on board as a seaman and that is what he told us he did. Mr. Jones, the first officer, in the same way told us that that was the sort of thing he did, and I have no doubt that there were many deeds of a similar character of which we have heard nothing, but which were in fact performed.

Now that, my Lord, leads me to deal with Mr. Thomas's evidence, and I speak in no spirit of hostility to Mr. Thomas, far from it. Mr. Thomas said many things which I pray in aid. As I pointed out I directly hold no brief for the sailors; I rather think that is Mr. Cotter's duty. But appearing as I do on behalf of the Cunard Company, I think it is only right to say as I have said, that I submit the evidence establishes that the sailormen on board the "Lusitania” did not fail. It is to be remembered that Mr. Thomas's opportunities for accurate observation were poor, they were short. I notice his main desire was to save his life and probably to save the life of his daughter, and I do not suggest for one moment that he has not come here wishing to give your Lordship what he conceives to be the facts of the case; but it is to be noticed that whereas in the statement that he made to the Board of Trade, his attention is directed to the conduct of those engaged in the management of the ship, this very grave and very serious reflection is not made in that statement. It may be of course that he has recollected it since.

The Commissioner:
is there any objection to potting that statement of Mr. Thomas in?

Mr. Butler Aspinall:
I cross-examined Mr. Thomas to it and to that extent it is in evidence.

The Commissioner:
Is there any objection to putting it in?

The Solicitor-General:
Not on the part of the Board of Trade.

The Commissioner:
Then put it in.

Mr. Butler Aspinall:
I want Mr. Thomas to perfectly understand that I am in no way reflecting on the honesty of his evidence, not for one moment, Of course it is a grave matter. These men were men in a humble position of life, but their character is to them just as valuable an asset as it is to us.

The Commissioner:
I want on this part of the case to ask you a question. I was told, I think, in the course of the Inquiry that the crew who sign on at Liverpool sign on for the return voyage. That is so, is it?

Mr. Butler Aspinall:
Yes.

The Commissioner:
They go out and home.

Mr. Butler Aspinall:
Yes.

The Commissioner:
Have the men the right as the law stands, to be paid off if they choose at New York?

Mr. Butler Aspinall:
I think not.

The Commissioner:
Could you tell me, Mr. Edwards? Supposing the men sign on at Liverpool for the round journey out and back?

Mr. Clem Edwards:
It would depend entirely, my Lord, upon their articles.

The Commissioner:
What I mean is this, suppose they sign on there and back have they under the law a right to claim their discharge and be paid their wages at New York?

Mr. Clem Edwards:
No, my Lord.

The Commissioner:
If they obey the law they must come back in the boat they went in.

Mr. Clem Edwards:
That is so, my Lord.

The Commissioner:
Then they cannot be bound for more than one round voyage can they?

Mr. Clem Edwards:
Yes. There are time articles with some ships, my Lord, where they bind themselves to go for so long - two years in some cases.

The Commissioner:
Is it possible to bind a man for two years?

Mr. Clem Edwards:
I do not know that a case has been tested, my Lord. It is done in practice.

The Commissioner:
That is sufficient for me, if it is done in practice.

Mr. Clem Edwards:
Yes, my Lord.

Mr. Butler Aspinall:
My Lord, so much for the conduct of the master, officers and crew of the vessel. I also wish before I sit down to pay the tribute of the Cunard Company to the efforts and the successful efforts to save life that were made by the small craft that came out upon the scene of the wreck.

The Commissioner:
How many of these fishing craft were there?

Mr. Butler Aspinall:
I do not think there is any evidence with regard to their exact number. There were some four or five that we have heard of.

The Commissioner:
That is enough.

Mr. Butler Aspinall:
My Lord, the only other topic that it remains for me to discuss is the topic of the speed of the "Lusitania." Mr. Clem Edwards in his attack upon the navigation of the "Lusitania” emphasized that matter. I submit, my Lord, that the Cunard Company have nothing to reproach themselves with for having sent their ship to sea under such circumstances that she should travel at a reduced speed. They are, of course, a business company; they are not philanthropists; they send their vessels to sea in the hope of making a profit and what Mr. Booth told us was that in view of the war, and in view of the submarine menace, it was considered what was to be done, whether to keep both the "Lusitania" and the "Mauretania" in commission, and on this service, or were they not. They withdrew the "Mauretania," and they came to the conclusion, as I submit they were rightly entitled to do, having regard to the experience they had at the time that it was safe and reasonable to drive her at a speed of 21 knots through the water; in fact, my Lord, she still, I believe, continues to be the fastest vessel crossing the Atlantic, and it would mean that if it were wrong to send a ship to sea which would travel at only 21 knots, it would be almost criminal for the other passenger steamers which happily are still safely crossing the Atlantic to continue to do so. The Attorney-General who were keenly desirous of elucidating all the facts did ask Mr. Booth this, whether in view of the fact that on the Sunday be knew and heard that threats were being made in New York to torpedo the "Lusitania." he had taken any steps to inform the captain by wireless that he ought to take measures to accelerate his speed. Mr. Booth. I submit, gave a perfectly satisfactory and proper answer to that question. He said "No." He said, of course, we could have communicated with the ship, but we could only have done so through the Admiralty, and it may be there was just sufficient coal, no doubt a near thing. But after all, this is to be remembered, that in order to put your extra six boilers into commission you want the necessary equipment of firemen, stokers and greasers, and they were not there to do the work.

My Lord, I submit the comment made by Mr. Clem Edwards with regard to speed fails, and that there was nothing wrong with regard to the diminution of speed.

Now, in connection with that topic, may I remind your Lordship what the evidence of that boy whom I have already alluded to, young Leslie Morton, was as to what he saw with regard to the torpedo. He seems to be a distinctly intelligent lad, and he said when the torpedo was fired, he saw it coming about 500 yards away, and about 4 points on the starboard bow of the "Lusitania." Now that was the position fairly and substantially of the submarine at the time the torpedo was fired. Well, if you take that to be the ship, the picture, and if you put the torpedo off 4 points on her starboard bow, in view of the fact that she is very nearly 800 feet long, if there was to be anything in the nature of accurate firing, it is almost certain that she would get a hit, and I submit that this difference of speed, this reduction of speed was in the circumstances of the case negligible. My Lord, to sum the matter up, the two questions which mainly concern me are the two last questions, the questions whether the captain of the "Lusitania” and whether the owners of the "Lusitania” are to blame. I ask your Lordship with much confidence to answer those two questions in the negative.

The Solicitor-General:
Now, my Lord, I have the statement of Mr. Thomas which I will hand up to your Lordship (handing in the same), and I have those percentages worked out.

The Commissioner:
Just tell me what they are.

The Solicitor-General:
Of the total crew 41.7 were saved. Of the total passengers, including in that the men, women and children, 37.5 were saved. Of the total female passengers, 38.6; total male passengers, 38.8; total children 27.1.

The Commissioner:
There was a larger percentage of the crew saved than of passengers.

The Solicitor-General:
Certainly, my Lord, but, of course, as your Lordship will see (I am not concerned to argue it) - your Lordship will see that in dealing with the crew you are dealing with men who are in the main sailors, and are in the prime of life and are more accustomed to taking care of themselves than women and children.

The Commissioner:
However, there is the fact, that there is a larger percentage of the crew saved than of the passengers.

The Solicitor-General:
Yes.

The Commissioner:
Now I observe that the smallest percentage saved is in the children.

The Solicitor-General:
Yes.

The Commissioner:
There is a considerable difference.

The Solicitor-General:
Certainly.

The Commissioner:
Then I find that in the male passengers saved I suppose you are including the crew.

The Solicitor-General:
No, my, Lord. In dealing with the females, the figures I give your Lordship in terms relate to female and male passengers.

The Commissioner:
Does not it include the stewardesses?

The Solicitor-General:
I can give your Lordship separate figures for those. Of the males of the crew 41 per cent were saved; of the females of the crew 36 per cent were saved.

The Commissioner:
There again you see the number of women saved is less than the number of men.

The Solicitor-General:
Of course, your Lordship will see that quite a number of the crew and passengers found themselves in the water, and it becomes then a question of the power of resistance to exposure for many hours in the water. One has to climb on over turned boats, and in some cases swim a distance to a box, as one witness described it, and all those considerations have to be carefully borne in mind.

The Commissioner:
Have you got those percentages written down?

The Solicitor-General:
I have them written down in a more formal fashion. Mr. Branson will write them down and give them to your Lordship.

The Commissioner:
As I look at it, they seem to carry out Mr. Thomas's suggestion.

The Solicitor-General:
I have made the only comment I want to make upon them.

The Commissioner:
Now I shall want to hear some one from the Board of Trade and you, Mr. Aspinall, or your junior tomorrow morning at half-past ten in the room here at the back of the Court upon the question of the navigation of the vessel.

The Solicitor-General:
If your Lordship pleases.

(Adjourned to tomorrow at 10.30 o'clock.)