Page 26 - British Inquiry into Loss of RMS Titanic Day 14 - 18
P. 26
“Baltic.” 16375. How would you know that? - By the call letters. 16376. Which would indicate the “Baltic”? - Yes. 16377. Was that the message which you first overheard? - Yes. 16378. What did you do? What I want to know is could you tell whether the “Baltic” was receiving the message? - The “Baltic” did eventually receive the message. 16379. How do you know that? - Because she acknowledged it to the “Californian.” 16380. Did you hear the message from the “Baltic” to the “Californian”? - Yes. 16381. Did you realise from that that it was an ice report? - Yes. 16382. Then during this time did you know that there was any message that the “Californian” had for you? - I knew it was the same message that the “Californian” had for me. 16383. You mean that your letters were called: is that it? Sir Robert Finlay: No. 16384. (The Attorney-General - To the Witness.) Just let us see what you mean by that. I understood you to tell us that you heard the message between the “Californian’ and the “Baltic.” Is that what you have said? - Yes. 16385. How do you know the message was for you? - Because the “Californian” had called me previously and said she had an ice report for me. 16386. Then you heard what was taking place, and you knew what the report was? - Yes. Sir Robert Finlay: I think that the message was sent to the “Titanic,” but, as I understand the witness, he was busy and did not attend to it at the time. That was a message to the “Titanic.” Then afterwards he heard the same message repeated to the “Baltic.” The Attorney-General: I do not think that is what he said. The Solicitor-General: That is neither his evidence nor is it the fact. The Attorney-General: I have not heard the witness say a word about that, but we will see. It may be right. All I mean is that it is not as I understood what was the witness’s evidence, because he has not said that. Sir Robert Finlay: I understood him to say he did not acknowledge the message when it was sent to the “Titanic,” and he afterwards heard the same message being sent by the “Californian” to the “Baltic.” 16387. (The Attorney-General.) It may be so; we will get it quite clear. It is quite possible that is right. (To the Witness.) Was that right? Did you hear what my learned friend Sir Robert Finlay said just now? - Perfectly correct. 16388. So that although you knew you were called, you had something else to do; you were busy at the time? - Yes. 16389. Then you eventually overheard it? - Yes. 16390. (The Commissioner.) I do not want you to skip over that. What business had you that you were attending to at the moment? - I was attending to another branch of my work. 16391. What branch? - I was writing up the accounts. 16392. Pounds, shillings and pence, you mean? - Yes. 16393. The account book? - Yes. 16394. That is what you were attending to at that particular time? - Yes. 16395. (The Attorney-General.) Did you send any message yourself in answer? - Yes, I acknowledged the receipt of the report. 16396. To whom? - To the “Californian.” 16397. Do you remember what it was you said? - Not the exact words, but it was to the effect that I had overheard him send it and that I had taken it down. The Attorney-General: Your Lordship will remember, if you want the passage where this is dealt with by Evans, it is at page 202, Question 8972: “(Q.) What did the ‘Titanic’ say to you
   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31