PERCY HILLHOUSE,
naval architect,
Recalled.
By Lord Mersey:
6404. You have been sworn, Mr. Hillhouse?
- Yes, sir.
By Mr. Newcombe:
6405. You have stated, Mr. Hillhouse, that you are the naval architect of the Fairfield Shipbuilding and Engineering Company?
- Yes.
6406. The builders of the Empress of Ireland?
- Yes.
6407. She was constructed at Govan, in 1906?
- Yes.
6408. Was she constructed according to design and specifications prepared by the Fairfield Company?
- No, the design and specifications were received from the Canadian Pacific Railway Company.
6409. And your company, upon that design and specification not prepared by them, contracted the construction of the ship?
- Yes.
6410. Her machinery also; was that constructed by the Fairfield Company?
- Yes.
6411. According to specifications furnished?
- According to specifications received from the Canadian Pacific Railway.
6412. Now, do you produce copies of the specifications of the vessel and of the machinery?
- Yes.
6413. Are they contained in these books?-
- Yes.
Lord Mersey:
They had better be handed in and marked.
By Mr. Newcombe:
6414. Specifications of a steel twin screw passenger teteamer. Now, have you copies there -
- Yes, I have copies there.
By Lord Mersey:
6415. Who was the vessel designed by?
- The vessel was designed by the late Dr. Francis Elgar.
By Mr. Newcombe:
6416. Now, the specifications of the hull are marked ‘X’ and the thin copy, specifications of the machinery, is marked ‘Y.’ The plans of the ship you have already produced and explained?
- Yes.
6417. Under what survey was this vessel built?
- She was built under Lloyds survey to class star 100 A-1, the star indicating that the vessel was surveyed during construction and not merely classified after she had been built.
6418. Was she also surveyed by the Board of Trade?
- Yes.
6419. And classed as star A-1 at Lloyd’s, under their rules, I suppose, applicable to vessels of her design?
- Yes, of the highest class contained in their rules.
6420. It was a vessel with three decks and a shelter deck?
- Yes.
6421. Were these the rules of 1891, do you happen to know?
- No, these were the rules in force at the time. The construction was begun about January, 1905, and was finished in June, 1906, so that the rules under which she was built would be Lloyds rules in force in the early part of 1905.
6422. Was she built in accordance with British Admiralty requirements for conversion into an armed cruiser or troop ship?
- I do not think so; I cannot be sure on that point.
6423. According to the statement which I have, she was so built, with all strengthenings required for mounting guns. Will you look at No. 6 on page 5 of Exhibit ‘X’? (handed to witness).
- I have no recollection of any special strengthening having been put in for guns.
6424. What was the dead weight capacity of the ship?
- She carried a total dead weight of 6,900 tons upon a draught of 27 feet 6 inches.
6425. That is the mean low draught?
- Yes.
6426. Including cargo, coal, passengers?
- Including cargo, coal, passengers, baggage, stores, and water.
6427. Crew?
- Crew and effects.
6428. And spare gear?
- Spare gear.
6429. The dimensions of the ship, length between perpendiculars?
- 550 feet; breadth 65½ feet and depth to the upper deck, 40 feet.
6430. Will you describe the decks. She had four steel decks, I believe? Would you like to refer to the plans?
- I think I can remember that. All her decks were of steel. There were four continuous steel decks extending from the stem to the stern, namely the shelter deck the upper deck, the main deck and the lower deck. In addition to that there were a number of decks of steel which did not extend the whole length, the orlop deck, which occurs only at the two ends in the lower part of the ship, and above we have the lower promenade, upper promenade, and boat deck, which occur in the amidships portion.
6431. The orlop deck is in the fore and aft hold?
- Yes.
6432. What is the thickness of the steel of those decks?
- For that I would have to refer to the amidships section plan.
6433. Have you got duplicates of that there?
- Not of the amidships sections.
(Plan produced by witness.)
By Lord Mersey:
6434. Is that the amidships section?
- Yes, my Lord. The shelter and upper decks are each 9-20ths of an inch thick; the main and lower decks 8-20ths of an inch.
By Mr. Newcombe:
6435. And these plans show the general arrangement of the ship’s sides?
- Yes, sir.
6436. Now, take the space between the decks; measure from top of beam to top of beam in each case, the distance between the main deck and the lower deck would be what?
- These between-deck spaces are 8 feet in all cases, except the decks above the shelter deck.
6437. And also the promenade deck above the shelter deck?
- Is 8 feet 8 inches.
6438. The upper promenade deck above the lower promenade deck?
- 8 feet 6 inches.
6439. And the boat deck 8 feet 6 inches above the upper promenade?
- Yes.
6440. What was the height of the boat deck above the water line at low draught?
- 45 feet.
6441. Have you produced a plan showing the port holes in the sides of the ship and the cabins and passages on the various decks?
- Yes.
6442. That is in evidence?
- Yes.
6443. Can you give the heights from the waterline to the under side of each row of these port holes in the side of the ship?
- Yes, that can be given.
6444. Would you rather figure that out?
- Yes, it would be better to give me a little time to do it.
6445. Make a note that this be done.
Lord Mersey:
How long are you likely to be with this witness, do you think? Are the divers here?
Mr. Newcombe:
They are here; I should think I would be an hour.
Lord Mersey:
Do you not think it would be better for us to hear the divers now?
Mr. Newcombe:
I think so. (To witness): You may retire for the present.
Lord Mersey:
While you are out you may make the calculation that Mr. Newcombe asked you for.
Witness retired.