Page 219 - British Inquiry into Loss of RMS Titanic Day 14 - 18
P. 219
increase? - It is not necessary to take any precautions. They would not send a boat away for boat work with less than two seamen in it. 19424. So that it is the intention that two men shall be on board each lifeboat? - There is no regulation on that subject, but I am sure no lifeboat would be sent away for boat work with less than two seamen in it. 19425. But, then, you do not say that it is your purpose where you have increased lifeboat accommodation to secure that of your crew you shall have two seamen for each boat? - For each boat on board? 19426. Yes? - No. 19427. (The Commissioner.) I do not understand that, Mr. Sanderson. Are there not two seamen allocated to each lifeboat on the vessel? - No, my Lord. 19428. Why not? - Because I think it would mean providing the ship with an unnecessary number of sailors. Under no conceivable circumstances that I can think of would it be necessary to provide for manning for boat work all the boats on the ship. 19429. I think, Mr. Sanderson, there are instructions relating to emigrant ships issued by the Board of Trade, are there not? - There are, my Lord. 19430. And this subject that Mr. Scanlan is upon is dealt with in those instructions? - I have not read them recently; I do not recall the point. 19431. In the Company’s steamships are what are called deckhands sailors? - Yes. 19432. “In steamships deckhands should be carried in accordance with the following, which is based upon the total boat and raft capacity with which the ship is required to be provided under the statutory rules relating to life-saving appliances;” and then we get the total capacity of boats and rafts required and the life-saving appliances. Take 9,300 cubic feet - you must have apparently 48 deckhands? - That is quite right, my Lord. 19433. Now then, I see it goes on to say that the term “deckhands” means the master and mates and all bona fide able-bodied seamen? - We go far in excess of that, my Lord. 19434. Now if you were to go further would it follow that you would have a number of deckhands, these able-bodied seamen, doing nothing at all during the whole of the voyage, or the whole of the return voyage, doing nothing at all, in fact, until the wreck of the steamer? - That would be correct; we should have to make work for them. 19435. You would have to keep them doing nothing in anticipation of the wreck of the steamer? - That is true, my Lord. Mr. Scanlan: If I am right, from what my Lord has read to you from the regulations, the 48 men mentioned there would be where your lifeboat accommodation was for 900 persons? The Commissioner: No, no, 9,300 cubic feet. 19436. (Mr. Scanlan.) I think it works out at 10 cubic feet per person, and, generally speaking, that is for 900 people? - Yes, that is correct. 19437. So that if you carried your boat accommodation up to, say, 32, or for double that number of people, you would require a greater number of seamen? - If we are going to put all those boats into the water for boat work, not flotation. 19438. If the requirements of this regulation of the Board of Trade were extended in correspondence with the number of boats carried, and increasing accommodation, it follows that there would be a considerable increase in the number of men? - If the Board of Trade increased the scale that my Lord has read out the number of men would have to be increased, no doubt. 19439. (The Commissioner.) But my point is this, and I want to know whether I am right or wrong about it. Would the effect of making that increase in the number of men be, that you would be carrying always a number of men who could not be employed? - That is perfectly true, my Lord. The ship is efficiently manned now for all reasonable purposes. 19440. (Mr. Scanlan.) Does it suggest itself to you that this demand might be met if the
   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224