DEPOSITION OF RIGHT HONORABLE ALEXANDER MONTGOMERY CARLISLE - Continued.
Q. Did you regard it as being the work of the Oceanic Company to order how many boats they wished, within the number which could be accommodated by your davits?
Mr. Duke:
I submit that is not an admissible question. The opinion of the witness does not affect any legal right.
Mr. Scanlan:
Your plan showed how a certain number of boats could be fitted?
- Yes.
Q. Did it rest with the Oceanic Company themselves to order as many as they liked up to that number?
- Of course they could have put them in at Belfast or Liverpool, or any place they liked. We had nothing to do with the ship. All we had to do was to make her pass the Board of Trade. The complement of the boats she had on board was much over what the Board of Trade at that time required.
Q. At this interview in London, or at this interview in conjunction with certain other interviews, were the designs of the davits as you had brought them forward, passed by Mr. Ismay and his co-Director?
- I believe so.
Q. Up to the time you left, had any decision been come to as to the number of lifeboats?
- None.
Cross-examined by Mr. DUKE.
Q. With whom did it rest, so far as the complement of boats for a passenger ship was concerned, at the time you have been speaking of, to decide what complement of boats was required?
- The Board of Trade.
Q. Had this vessel, when she sailed, as large a complement of boats as the Board of Trade Regulations required?
- I believe considerably more.
Mr. Scanlan:
I feel it necessary to object to any questions as to the Board of Trade Regulations until the Board of Trade Regulations are produced and either admitted or proved.
Mr. Duke:
What accommodation of boats, as far as your recollection goes, did the Board of Trade Regulations require?
- The largest number they required was for a 10,000 ton ship.
Q. What was the capacity of the boats?
- I have no note of that.
Q. Would the cubic capacity which was required by the Board of Trade Regulations be 5,500 cubic ft.?
Mr. Scanlan:
I object to the question.
The Witness:
I believe it was something about that. I know nothing about it.
Mr. Duke:
Was there 5,500 cubic ft. plus three-fourths of 5,500, that is to say, 9,625 ft.?
- Did I give that in evidence?
Q. If you ask me: you did.
- Then I got the figures for it. Whatever I gave in evidence is quite correct, but I have none of my figures now.
Q. Was the boat accommodation on the "Titanic" something like 20 per cent or 25 per cent above that?
- I believe so.
Q. Namely, 11,327 cubic ft.?
- I believe so.
Q. Was the purpose for which you presented the plans of davits, of which you have told us, to save expense to the owners of the "Titanic", in case new Regulations should be made which required a greater boat accommodation?
- Yes.
Q. Was that question of the requisite boat accommodation on liners a subject which had been a matter of a good deal of discussion?
- Yes.
Q. Were varying views taken, owing to the effect upon the ship of the increased provision of boats?
- Yes.
Q. And the tendency to make the ship tender in navigation?
- Yes.
Q. And other matters affecting navigation?
- Yes.
Q. And by that means, were there divided opinions among men of experience as to what was advisable?
- Yes.
Q. At a date not far removed from that time, was the Board of Trade advised by a Committee of experts to which it referred the matter, that a less provision of boats than that provided for by the Board of Trade Regulations was sufficient for one of these ships?
- I believe so.
Q. The davits which were here in question were a new patented type of davit, I think?
- Yes.
Q. In which you had taken a scientific interest because of your interest in ship construction?
- Yes.
Q. That being the case, did you think it the proper thing to suggest that, in view of the possibility that changes might be made, the owners of the ship should equip the ship with these davits in the first instance, instead of with davits which they might have to remove?
- Yes.
Q. With regard to the construction of vessels for the Oceanic Company, had Messrs. Harland & Wolff been their builders for a great many years?
- Nearly forty-five years.
Q. Are you able to tell me whether Messrs. Harland & Wolff are a firm of shipbuilders of the highest reputation?
- I believe so.
Q. In the preparation of the plans of this vessel, was there, in your judgment, used the highest degree of scientific skill?
- I believe so.
Q. Do you know that with regard to the provision of passenger ships for the Oceanic Company, the rule of the Oceanic Company was to place no stint upon the expenditure by the shipbuilders in the carrying out of the work?
- Yes.
Mr. Scanlan:
I object to this.
Mr. Duke:
Do you know that the mode in which the Oceanic Company dealt with Messrs. Harland & Wolff was to instruct them to carry out their own recommendations without any stint as to the cost of carrying them out?
- Yes.
Q. Did thy pay actual cost plus a percentage upon cost?
- Yes.
Re-examined by Mr. SCANLAN.
Q. Some suggestion was made to you by my learned friend, Mr. Duke, that one of the elements in considering about lifeboat accommodation was the question of tenderness produced by a number of boats?
- Yes.
Q. Is it not the case that any such tenderness is corrected by ballasting -- that is the way it is corrected, is it not?
- Yes, that is the way you would correct it.
Q. You have been asked the terms as between Messrs. Harland & Wolff and The Oceanic Steam Navigation Company on which the "Titanic" was constructed. I want you to direct your mind to this matter: Was it the practice of the Directors of The Oceanic Steam Navigation Company from time to time to make alterations in your plans for decoration and equipment of the ships?
(Question objected to as leading)
- Yes.
Q. Did it rest with the Directors of The Oceanic Company to give the order and say themselves how many lifeboats the "Titanic" should carry?
- If they liked they could have given an order, yes.
Q. When you prepared those plans or the designs for davits to accommodate the lifeboats, was it present to your mind that the Oceanic Steam Navigation Company might, quite irrespective of the Board of Trade, order a greater number of boats than the Board of Trade scale provided?
(Question objected to as being leading, and as not arising out of the cross-examination)
- Yes.
Q. Did you yourself come to the conclusion that it would be desirable, in view of the size of the "Titanic", to equip her with a large number of lifeboats?
(Question objected to as being deliberately irregular.)
- I had left the Yard before that part came on.
Q. When Mr. Duke says "deliberately irregular", he means to be offensive to me. I do not mind that in the least, and I do not want you to pay any regard to it. You can answer my question irrespective of what Mr. Duke says.
- The subject of the actual number of boats had not come up before I left the works. The ships had not been launched, and therefore it was a matter of fitting the ships and building the boats after I was out of the employ.
Q. You have given some evidence of this already -----
(Question objected to on the ground that the witness was being cross-examined by the gentleman who had called him)
Q. You are not, being cross-examined. In view of the size of the "Titanic" -- that she was a ship of over 45,000 tons, and that the Board of Trade scale only provided for ships up to 10,000 tons, did you form a conclusion as to the number of lifeboats which the "Titanic" should carry?
- No.
Q. Had davits of the Welin pattern been supplied for other White Star boats built prior to the "Titanic" and the "Olympic"?
- No, those were the first ships which ever got that davit. They had them single acting, but they never had that particular pattern and design.
Q. Did those double acting davits provide for the first time, in regard to ships built for the Oceanic Steam Navigation Company, for more than a single boat to each set of davits?
- Yes. In the original type you could have hung the one outside and one above, if you had liked, but you could not have put the inside boat; that is the only difference.
Q. Did those new davits provide for a larger number of heats being carried?
- Yes, if required.
Q. Was the fact that those davits provided for a larger number of lifeboats made plain at those interviews that you had, to Mr. Ismay and Mr. Sanderson?
- I could not say that it was, any more than the plans showing the thing. The number of boats was not gone into at that time; it was only showing that could be done.
(Adjourned till Monday morning at 10.30)