Page 150 - British Inquiry into Loss of RMS Titanic Day 19 - 22

book called “Instructions relating to Emigrant Ships” is on page 9 where you will find the instructions relating to the manning. The Commissioner: At page 10 you get the capacity of lifeboats and so on. The Attorney-General: Yes, that is quite right. The Commissioner: And the number of deckhands to be carried. 22199. (The Attorney-General.) Yes, and if you look at the number of deckhands to be carried in that Table, you will find 48 is the number which would be applicable to this vessel. Now, we need not trouble about the loadline. There are provisions with regard to that, but I do not think any question arises in this case with reference to the loadline on the certificate of the loadline. If it does become necessary Sir Walter can give some information with regard to it. (To the Witness.) But I want you now to go to bulkheads and watertight compartments. First of all, will you tell me, does the Board of Trade, speaking generally, interfere with the design of the vessel? - No, the Board of Trade has always been very reluctant to do that. 22200. Is that left to the shipowner and shipbuilders? - Yes, I think so. 22201. Has it been thought, as a matter of policy, that hard-and-fast regulations would tend to cramp the free development of shipbuilding in this country? - I think that exactly explains the position. 22202. Is that also the case in connection with bulkheads and the subdivision of a vessel into watertight compartments? - Yes. 22203. And has that same policy been pursued? - Yes, I think generally speaking, it has. 22204. Subject to certain specific matters to which we will call attention. Let us get the history shortly to what the Board of Trade has done with regard to bulkheads. First of all the Steam Navigation Act of 1846 required steam vessels to be built with a bulkhead on each side of the engine room thus dividing the ship into three watertight compartments? - That was so. 22205. There was a similar requirement in the Merchant Shipping Act, 1854? - Yes. 22206. In 1862 was it thought that the old requirements were unsuitable? - Yes, they were thought to be entirely unsuitable, and the law was repealed in that year. 22207. I want to draw particular attention to this. Since 1862, and apart from Rule 12 of the Life-saving Appliance Rules, have any requirements been made or laid down by Statute as to bulkheads and watertight compartments? - No. The Attorney-General: Your Lordship will see Rule 12, to which attention has been called at some time in the case, but of which I remind your Lordship at the present moment - it is page 16 of the Book containing the rules for life-saving appliances. The only points of it, your Lordship will remember, is that if the ships are divided into efficient watertight compartments to the satisfaction of the Board of Trade then they are required to carry a less number of additional boats. The Commissioner: Yes. 22208. (The Attorney-General.) That is the point. The Witness: That is exactly so. 22209. That is to say, that the requirements upon the ship to carry additional boats is lessened by one-half? - Three-quarters in some cases. 22210. But it is lessened by one-half, is it not? - Yes. 22211. And some three-fourths? - Yes. 22212. You understand what I am putting? - Yes. 22213. Whatever it may be, if X is the requirement of additional boats, if the ship is divided into efficient watertight compartments to the satisfaction of the Board of Trade it is only one-half of X which has to be carried by that ship? - Yes. 22214. In point of fact, your Lordship will remember no question arises in this case with regard to it, because no such application was made by the “Titanic” to the Board of Trade. And, apart