Page 245 - British Inquiry into Loss of RMS Titanic Day 14 - 18

that the Captains do exercise their power to deviate whenever they think it necessary for any purpose whatever. 19775. I do not want to argue with you as to what the effect is, but they show clearly that when they report to you they have deviated for derelicts, or on account of heavy labourings - I see that is one of the reports - and that the explanation has been accepted by the Company? - Yes. 19776. It shows that, I agree. What I wanted to know was whether there were any reports of deviation on account of ice being encountered or reported on the track from Queenstown to New York? - I have no others to put forward than those. The only ones that I see are these two, and they are both after the event, the 24th April, 1912, and the 27th April, 1912. Sir Robert Finlay: You see the ice has been coming so much further South. 19777. (The Attorney-General.) I understand, of course, that there is more ice this year. That is quite right? - May I put it this way, Sir, that we have issued no fresh instructions in regard to deviating from the track since the “Titanic” accident. 19778. I only want to get the fact; the argument will be of interest later on to the Court. Am I right in this, that you can only find reports of deviations from the track since the “Titanic” accident? - I take your word for it. I have not looked at them very carefully. 19779. It is quite clear that there are no others here? - I simply handed in the bundle as I got it from Liverpool. The Attorney-General: The first, my Lord, is on the 24th April, 1912, and it is this: “Track. Owing to the numerous ice reports received, I deemed it prudent not to go North of latitude 40° until in the vicinity of longitude 55° W. Trusting that my deviating from the usual track will meet with the approval of the management,” and that is commended. The Commissioner: What vessel is that? The Attorney-General: The “Canopic,” I am told. It is dated from Boston, the 24th April, 1912. The Commissioner: And the Master of that vessel, of course, had heard of the loss of the “Titanic.” The Attorney-General: Quite. This is sent by him from Boston on the 24th April, and the “Titanic,” as your Lordship knows, was reported on the 15th April. The other one is the “Laurentic,” on a voyage Eastward, according to this. The Commissioner: These are not of much value. The Attorney-General: I think none. The Commissioner: For two reasons. In the first place they relate to a time when an extraordinary quantity of ice was apparently about; and secondly they relate to a time subsequent to the loss of the “Titanic.” The Attorney-General: Quite. I do not think they are of any importance, for that reason. The Witness: I understood the Attorney-General to say, my Lord, that there is one there from the Canadian service. 19780. (The Attorney-General.) Yes, there is one in September, 1911? - Is it fair to ignore that, because the Canadian service is under the same Regulations in regard to tracks, but they have different tracks. I mean the same authority is given to the captains. The Attorney-General: That is quite right; there is one on September 24th, 1911. 19780a. (The Commissioner.) That, of course, relates to a different track? - It is a different track, my Lord, but the discretion in both cases is the same. 19780b. (The Attorney-General.) Again, you know, I do not agree with that - that the same instructions are sent. Upon the evidence the same instructions are not given? - I beg your pardon; I did not mean to say that; I said the same discretion. The Attorney-General: Discretion, yes, of course. Your Lordship will remember we had this yesterday.