Page 149 - British Inquiry into Loss of RMS Titanic Day 32 - 36

- (A.) About a foot. (Q.) Working up to their knees? - (A.) Yes. (Q.) Scraping the cinders out? - (A.) Yes.” I think that is all the evidence there is. The Commissioner: What that comes to, it appears to me, is this, that the water, as far as these two witnesses could tell, was not coming from the side of the ship. The Attorney-General: Yes, neither of them certainly saw it coming from there. The Commissioner: That looks as if that part of the ship was not holed, and if that part of the ship was not holed then that water that they saw must have come over the bulkhead. The Attorney-General: Of course, there is another possibility which you must take into account, that they are standing on the plates; they would not see whether the water was coming in below the plate; they would not see whether the water was coming in at the side of the ship below the plate. The Commissioner: No, their impression is apparently - that is all I can say - that the water was not coming in from the side of the ship. That seems to me to show if their impression is a well- formed impression that that part of the ship was not holed. I quite agree it is speculation, because that part of the ship might be holed and might have been holed below the plates on which they were standing. The Attorney-General: Yes. The Commissioner: But they do not seem to have thought there was any water coming in from the side of the ship, and if it was not it must have been coming in over the bulkhead. The Attorney-General: I do not think really that is the effect of the evidence, with all respect. Look at what Cavell said. I do not know that it is of any importance, but if it is - The Commissioner: It is only important upon this question whether the ship would have been saved by having a higher bulkhead. The Attorney-General: Yes, but it is a question you will not have to decide. The Commissioner: I do not think it is necessary to decide that. The Attorney-General: I rather understood that you were not going to decide that. The Commissioner: But if I am to give a description as well as I can of the circumstances which sent this ship down to the bottom, I should have to consider that, I think. The Attorney-General: All I want to observe with reference to it is this: If your Lordship notices the form of the question which is put to both witnesses, Dillon and Cavell, and the answer, what they are asked is whether they saw water coming in. The Commissioner: And what you say is she may have been holed all the same. The Attorney-General: Quite; the water was coming up the stokehold plates. The Commissioner: And the hole might have been beneath the plates from which they saw water coming up. The Attorney-General: Yes. The Commissioner: All I mean is the answer “We saw no water coming in from the side,” that probably meant they did not believe the ship was holed in the side at that place. It is pointed out to me, it is of no importance unless it is maintained that putting the bulkhead higher would not have saved the ship or prolonged the life of the ship. The Attorney-General: I am going to point out the position we are in with regard to it. I will deal with it at once, because it will be an answer to what your Lordship was putting. That part of the case as to whether it is desirable to carry the bulkheads higher or whether it is desired to have a watertight deck, so far as I understood from what your Lordship said at an early period, is a part of the case which you do not intend to deal with; that is to say, that you do not intend to make any specific recommendation with regard to that. Your Lordship’s view, as I follow it, is that there is a Special Committee which has been appointed for the purpose of considering the spacing and construction of the watertight compartments, and as I followed your Lordship’s view, it was that you could not and would not go into that matter in this Enquiry; it would take a