Page 61 - British Inquiry into Loss of RMS Titanic Day 1 - 5
P. 61
624. So that it would require more skilled men? - They would want to be skilled men. 625. I understood you to say you formerly worked for the Union Castle Company? - Yes. 626. And you had systematic boat drill? - Yes. 627. Have you been on any other boat of the White Star Line except the “Titanic”? - Yes, the “Teutonic.” Mr. Lewis: I take it I am in order to ask what is the general practice on the White Star boats. I want to ask whether Mr. Scarrott has had experience of other White Star Line boats. The Commissioner: He has told you he has been on the “Teutonic.” 628. (Mr. Lewis.) Did any boat drills take place while you were on the “Teutonic”? - Yes. 629. Regularly? - One drill during the voyage. 630. (The Commissioner.) How long was the voyage? - Three weeks then. 631. Where was it from and to? - From Southampton to New York and back. 632. Did the “Teutonic” take three weeks to get to New York? - It was on a different service from what we are on now. 633. I never heard of a White Star liner taking three weeks to get from Southampton to New York. I should think a sailing ship could do it. When is the time you are talking about? - Our contract lasted for that time that we belonged to that ship. Our agreement was, when we belonged to that ship, for a voyage of three weeks, occupied from Southampton to New York and return. 634. (Mr. Lewis.) You mean there and back do you? - Yes. 635. You said the collapsible boat or raft was waterlogged? - No, not waterlogged; it was awash. 636. Was it serviceable; was it of any use? - No. The Commissioner: What are you talking about now? Mr. Lewis: I am talking about the collapsible boat termed a raft and asking the Witness whether it was in his opinion at all serviceable. I asked him if it was waterlogged, and he tells me he thinks it was not serviceable. 637. (The Commissioner.) I understood him to say that he did not think it was waterlogged. (To the Witness.) Was it waterlogged? - It was full of water; its compartments were full of water. 638. You think it was waterlogged? - Yes. 639. What happened to it? - It was unserviceable. 640. When was this? - When we went to take the survivors off of it. 641. At all events it was serviceable enough to keep afloat? - Yes. 642. And to preserve the people on it? - Yes. 643. And then you took the people off it? - Yes. 644. (Mr. Lewis.) Was that the only raft or collapsible boat that you saw? - No, that was not the only one, but that was the only one I saw in that condition. 645. You saw others in the water? - Yes. 646. (The Commissioner.) How many? - One other. 647. (Mr. Lewis.) Were there passengers in that? - Yes. Re-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL. 648. You have told us you saw another raft, what we have called an Englehardt collapsible boat. Was that one waterlogged? - No. 649. So that she was doing her service properly? - Yes, she was full of passengers; we had her in tow at the time. 650. One question, I want to ask you about the Sunday when the vessel sank; when she came into collision with the iceberg did you notice at all any difference in the temperature; did it get
   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66