Page 55 - British Inquiry into Loss of RMS Titanic Day 23 - 26
P. 55
was laid before the Marine Department, and I had nothing further to do with it. 23325. Then you are not able to tell us the history of your letter after you sent it in February, 1911? - I am able to give you some idea as to what transpired. As I say, it was compared with the recommendations of other officers in the Board’s service, and it was not acted upon. 23326. Do you want me to infer from that that other officers did not agree with you? - They did to a certain extent. It was only a question of difference of degree. 23327. I do not know what that means, quite. Do you mean that other officers thought your requirements or suggestions were excessive? - That I do not know. I do not think so particularly, excepting that the Principal Officer at Glasgow, by recommending to the Board a smaller number of boats, one would infer that he disagreed. But that was not expressed to me. I only gathered that from the fact that he sent in a recommendation which was lower than mine. 23328. (Mr. Scanlan.) When you sent in this report in February, 1911, I presume it would go directly to Sir Walter Howell? - Yes, it would be addressed to the Assistant Secretary. 23329. Then you are able to tell us, because, of course, you know? - Oh, precisely - yes. 23330. It did go to Sir Walter Howell, and the officer who would be in a position to deal with it at that time was Sir Alfred Chalmers? - Yes, he was the Professional Officer, the principal member of the Marine Department at that period. The Commissioner (To Sir Alfred Chalmers): Now, Sir Alfred, do you remember anything about this? Sir Alfred Chalmers: Yes, I remember. The Commissioner: Now stand up, please, and tell us what you remember. Sir Alfred Chalmers: 8,200 cubic feet for the 26 boats, plus the 75 percent, which was 6,150, bringing the total to 14,350 cubic feet. The Commissioner: That would not accommodate 2,730. Sir Alfred Chalmers: No, 1,435. That is how I understand it. The reason it was not acted upon I cannot say. The Commissioner: You see, your recollection of what the report conveyed is quite different from the recollection of this gentleman here. Sir Alfred Chalmers: But the report will clear that up. I do not want to set my memory against his. My memory is clear that that was it. Mr. Laing: Your Lordship will remember where this Witness gave evidence in chief he said 8,200 - 26 boats of 8,200. 23331. (The Commissioner.) The figures I took down were 15,600 for the 26 boats. The Witness: We are on a different tack, my Lord. Mr. Scanlan asked if I would recommend boats of 600 cubic feet, and I said “Yes.” And 26 boats of 600 cubic feet would amount to that. But as I said just now, when I referred to my letter from Liverpool, I did not advocate that same capacity in my Liverpool letter. I did not remember at the moment what that capacity was, but I did remember what the number of boats was that I recommended, and that was 26. 23332. (The Commissioner - To the Witness.) I am sure it is not your fault, but I have entirely misapprehended what you were saying. Do you mean to say that when you recommended in your letter of February, 1911, or your Report, whichever it was, that there should be 26 boats under davits, they were smaller boats than the 600 cubic feet boats? - Apparently they would be, my Lord. 23333. Then there seems to be very little in it? - I can tell you in a moment what it would come to. The Commissioner: I cannot blame you, Mr. Scanlan, because I have taken the same view of it that you have taken, up to the present time. Mr. Scanlan: Of course, I take it we are getting the Report and the Minutes? 23334. (The Commissioner.) No doubt; we shall have it tomorrow.
   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60