Page 170 - British Inquiry into Loss of RMS Titanic Day 14 - 18

The Commissioner: Can you tell me - do not hold back your information till some later period, but tell me now, if you can - whether you have made any enquiries with reference to the communication to the “Daily Mail.” Mr. Scanlan: I have, my Lord. The Commissioner: Very well; now will you tell me the result? Mr. Scanlan: The result satisfies me that the design which I referred to was submitted by the builders to the Company which Mr. Ismay represents, and I suggest that the designer should be called to give evidence. The Commissioner: Who was the designer? Mr. Scanlan: The gentleman who gave the interview to the “Daily Mail.” The Commissioner: Do you mean Mr. Carlisle? Mr. Scanlan: Yes. Sir Robert Finlay: I have made enquiries about that and evidence may be given later. What I say is merely a statement of what I have been told will be proved. There was some discussion about it, not with the Company at all, but a discussion in view of the Advisory Committee of the Board of Trade requiring a greater number of boats. Your Lordship remembers there was an Advisory Committee appointed, which reported in July, 1911, and while that Committee was sitting it was thought possible that they might insist upon a larger number of boats; and there was some discussion, not with the “Oceanic” at all, but there was some discussion between the designer, I think, for Messrs. Harland and Wolff and another gentleman who had a patent with reference to the working of davits for these boats - Mr. Welin - as to how, if the Advisory Committee should recommend a larger number of boats, special arrangements might be made for getting these boats into the water with rapidity. One idea was by having the davits so that they could be put at a slope - bent over - and so enable those davits to get four boats into the water one after the other. The Commissioner: Is that the substance of what you have heard, Mr. Scanlan? Mr. Scanlan: No, my Lord, it is not quite in accordance with what I am instructed are the facts. I am instructed that, according to the facts, for the “Olympic” and the “Titanic” a special design by the builders was submitted to the owners. The Commissioner: Yes, but that is not quite the point. Was that special design made in view of the possibility of the Board of Trade requiring a larger number of boats? The Attorney-General: It cannot have been, on that statement. Mr. Scanlan: As far as my information goes the design was for the purpose of supplying those boats, the “Olympic” and the “Titanic,” with additional accommodation. The Attorney-General: Then it must have been before July, 1911. Sir Robert Finlay: I think Mr. Wilding, who will be called - I think my friend is going to call him - The Attorney-General: I am going to call him, but at the same time it is desirable that this should be cleared up. The Commissioner: I want it cleared up now. The Attorney-General: My friend, Mr. Scanlan, attributes some importance to it. We will take care that Mr. Carlisle, as far as we can, shall be called before the Court, and then we can get the answers from him. I know nothing about it at the present moment, except that I have heard the suggestion, and did mean to put some questions to Mr. Ismay about it, not as to 40 boats, but as to a larger number of boats having been at one time spoken of and shown in plans for the “Titanic” or the “Olympic.” The Commissioner: You were pointing out that when this vessel was constructed, this Advisory Committee did not exist. The Attorney-General: No, not quite. What I said was this: Mr. Scanlan said his point was that