Page 174 - British Inquiry into Loss of RMS Titanic Day 23 - 26

suggestions made by Mr. Carlisle? - Yes. 24739. Have you a Note of what he said with reference to 32 boats or 64 boats? - I do not think there is anything about 64. The Note breaks off twice in this way: “Mr. Carlisle then showed his plan - explained his plan.” 24740. Did he not suggest that you might have 64? - I remember his suggesting four boats on each davit. 24741. I see here in the Minute: “Mr. Carlisle: I think, if you will look at the model you will see there would be room in the ‘Olympic’ and the ‘Britannic’ for three or four more sets of davits on each side”? - Yes. 24742. Then does he refer also to four boats on each davit? - He showed us a davit which would carry four boats. 24743. There were 16 sets of such davits on the “Titanic”? - I am not sure if he told us they were for four boats each, or if they were for three - I am not sure which. 24744. (The Commissioner.) If they were for four, that would be 64 boats? - If you will look at page 54 I think you will find that that does not unfairly summarise the result of a somewhat long discussion. I say to Mr. Carlisle: “But you would not recommend us to adopt this plan and only to have one set of davits covering all those 4 boats. - Mr. Carlisle: No, I would stick to your row of 16. I think this is perfectly correct.” Mr. Carlisle, as I have stated, produced the scale showing the 16 boats under davits. You will find that on page 22. It begins with Mr. Rowe speaking. Mr. Carlisle handed his scale to Mr. Rowe, and Mr. Rowe sent it up to me, and then I summarised it: “I think Mr. Carlisle’s suggestion comes to this, that for boats that are to be readily available from the davits in the case of ships of from 10,000 to 12,000 tons it stops as it is, 16, all of which must be under davits; 12,000 to 20,000, 18, 16 of which must be under davits. Then 20,000 to 35,000, 20, 16 always under davits; 35,000 to 45,000, 22, 16 always under davits; 45,000 to 50,000, 24, 16, always under davits. That is adding between 10,000 and 20,000 two boats”; and in the discussion we talked about it as Mr. Carlisle’s scale. 24745. (Mr. Scanlan.) That is, Mr. Rowe did? - No. It was referred to, you will find, on many occasions or several occasions. 24746. On this occasion it is Mr. Rowe you are talking of? - Mr. Carlisle handed it to Mr. Rowe, and Mr. Rowe, who was sitting nearer to me, handed it to me. 24747. In fairness to Mr. Carlisle, I refer you to a passage on page 51: “I was asked if we were in a position to get boats. We could have got many more boats here if necessary, but there are only 16 required by the Board of Trade, and in getting out the plan we got it so as to work three or four davits under each set.” I presume that is a misprint for “three or four boats under each set.” “Whether he is going to fit in all this second lot of boats required by the Rule or not, I cannot say, but you could have it if you wanted it”? - Yes, he showed us the drawings of the davits. 24748. On the whole, is it not fair to Mr. Carlisle to state that he did bring before the Committee a scheme for increasing the boat accommodation to 64 on such a ship as the “Titanic”? - He showed us the plans; we debated them fully with him, and he also showed us his other scale. We debated both fully, and we adopted his own scale with modifications without any protest from him in any shape or form. 24749. And no doubt it is true, as Mr. Carlisle in his examination suggested to us, that he was influenced by the general discussion which went on and the persuasiveness of your argument amongst others? - That is absolutely incorrect, Mr. Scanlan. 24750. He made the proposals anyhow? - It is absolutely incorrect. 24751. It is correct that he made these proposals? - Yes. 25752. And it is also correct that your Committee did not adopt them? - It is correct that he placed two things before us. One was a scale based on sixteen boats under davits; one were plans