Page 170 - British Inquiry into Loss of RMS Titanic Day 23 - 26

24696. You strengthen No. 12? - Yes. 24697. But by strengthening No. 12 you weaken the provision for lifeboat accommodation? - If you have got a ship which the Board of Trade will pass as unsinkable - we know at that time that the “Titanic” did not comply with the Board’s conditions; we knew at the time that the “Mauretania” did not comply with the Board’s conditions; we knew at the time that the “Lusitania” did not comply with the Board’s conditions, and you may take it we knew there was no commercial ship afloat carrying these large numbers that did comply with the Board’s conditions which are Sir Edward Harland’s Committee’s report. 24698. Are you making a statement that the “Titanic” did not comply with the Board of Trade’s conditions? - It did not comply with Sir Edward Harland’s Committee’s report. 24699. I wish you to tell my Lord in what respect the “Titanic” failed to comply? - I could not, Mr. Scanlan. 24700. Why do you say that it failed to comply if you do not know in what respect it did fail? - I could only tell you that Mr. Carlisle told us - 24701. (The Commissioner.) May I interrupt you a moment. Do you say there is no commercial ship afloat which complies with the requirements of Sir Edward Harland’s Committee? - Well, my Lord, no ship carrying these large numbers in the emigrant trade. Perhaps there is one, my Lord. 24702. What is it? - It is one of the Cunard boats, one of the older Cunard boats, but we had it in evidence that plans of the “Mauretania” had been submitted and rejected as not being in accordance with Sir Edward Harland’s Committee. 24703. Rejected by whom? - By the Board of Trade as not being in accordance with Sir Edward Harland’s Committee, and the same as to the “Lusitania.” And Mr. Carlisle told us it was no good submitting the plans of the “Titanic” because they were not in accordance with Sir Edward Harland’s Committee, and that no commercial ship could be so built; and it was because of that recommendation that we advised a reconsideration of Sir Edward Harland’s recommendations. 24704. But I think we had some evidence that ships have been passed by the Board of Trade, I think four a year or something of that kind, that have complied with Clause 12? - The majority of them are quite small ships; some of them, I believe you will find, are ferry boats, and the majority of them I think you will find are small vessels. I think I am right in saying that there is only one emigrant ship which has complied. 24705. Only one emigrant ship? - I think I am right. 24706. Since the Rule came into existence? - Well, I will not say that; at the beginning for some years there were one or two. The Commissioner: If it is true, Mr. Attorney, I am afraid I have misconceived the effect of the evidence as to what has been done under Rule 12. It never occurred to me that when an average of four vessels were said to have come under this Rule per annum since it was in existence the vessels included ferry boats. The Attorney-General: We will see what it really does mean. 24707. (Mr. Scanlan - To the Witness.) Were you informed at the Board of Trade by some official of the Board of Trade that the “Titanic” did not comply with the Board of Trade’s requirements? - No, by Mr. Carlisle. 24708. Did you ask him in what respect was the failure of compliance? - Yes, there was a general discussion on that point. 24709. Can you tell us generally, if you cannot tell us accurately, what are the particulars in which the “Titanic” was deficient? - I think it is mainly a matter of longitudinal bulkheads. 24710. Longitudinal bulkheads? - I think so; that is my recollection. 24711. (The Commissioner.) Am I right in saying that the objection was that the ship had not