Page 169 - British Inquiry into Loss of RMS Titanic Day 23 - 26
P. 169
Examined by Mr. SCANLAN. 24679. Is it the case that this Sub-Committee dealing with life-saving appliances only met twice? - Twice. 24680. I gather they occupied part of the forenoon of each day? - Probably from half-past 10 to half-past 1 or 2. 24681. Is that the entire time taken by this Committee to deal with the question of the increase of lifeboat accommodation? - The entire time taken by the Sub-Committee. 24682. Had the Sub-Committee when it met any recommendations from the parent Committee with reference to lifeboat accommodation, and how it might be increased? - No. You complain of Mr. Carlisle’s evidence as being unfair to his fellow members? The Commissioner: Inaccurate. 24683. (Mr. Scanlan.) Inaccurate, and I think you also said unfair to the Committee? - Mr. Carlisle’s evidence, so far as the Committee is concerned, is an invention - a pure invention. 24684. Do you think that is quite fair to him? - What I stated? 24685. To characterise the whole of his evidence as pure invention? 24685A. (The Commissioner.) It is quite fair, if it is true, to say it. The Witness: And that it is true is shown absolutely by the Shorthand Note that was taken of the whole of the proceedings. 24686. (Mr. Scanlan.) We have had it from him that he only sat two days with you, and that is quite true? - Quite true. 24687. There is no invention about that? - It is an invention to put it that he only sat for the two last days, or whatever the implication is. The Commissioner: The impression that his evidence gives, I think you will see if you read it, is that he joined the Committee on the two last days of its sitting, as though it had been sitting for weeks before; and it was not, you know. 24688. (Mr. Scanlan - To the Witness.) But had not you, at all events, a meeting at which you decided to co-opt Mr. Carlisle on to your Committee? - We did that at the general meeting at which the Sub-Committee was appointed. 24689. So that it was not the Sub-Committee that decided on taking in Mr. Carlisle and Mr. Royden? - I believe it was the Sub-Committee, but we were all in the same room together; the Committee left it to the Sub-Committee. 24690. At any rate, that was one meeting before Mr. Carlisle came. The Commissioner: No, it is not. That was not a meeting of the Sub-Committee at all; that was a meeting of the General Committee. But it does not matter. 24691. (Mr. Scanlan.) But there were all the members of the Sub-Committee there. You contravert the statement made by Mr. Carlisle that the scale you arrived at provides for no increase in the lifeboat accommodation for ships like the “Titanic”? - I say it does provide 50 percent increase. 24692. Your evidence is it provides 50 percent increase. Now, I would like to refer you to paragraph 6 in your report which deals with the additional provision of lifeboats? - Yes. 24693. Where you have ships divided into watertight compartments - ? - To the satisfaction of the Board of Trade. 24694. Yes. Did not you propose there that the requirements of Section 12 of the original Rule should be departed from where the ships are provided with efficient watertight compartments? - I am afraid I do not quite follow, Mr. Scanlan. We exempt them altogether if they comply with the addition, certainly. 24695. You exempt them from any addition? - We strengthen Rule 12 in favour of shipping which complies with the requirements of the Board of Trade.
   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174