Titanic: A Survivor's Story (25 page)

No. You have taken that from the story in the American papers.

Mr. Stengel in his evidence in New York said, ‘Between Mr. Duff Gordon and myself we decided the direction of the boat.’

That’s not so; I did not speak to the coxswain in any way.

Lady Duff Gordon (Br. Inq.):

After the three boats had been gotten away my husband and I were left standing on the deck. Then my husband went up and said, might we not get into this boat, and the officer said very politely: ‘If you will do so I should be very pleased.’ Then somebody hitched me up at the back, lifted me up and pitched me into the boat. My husband and Miss Francatelli were also pitched into the boat; and then two Americans were also pitched in on top of us. Before the
Titanic
sank I heard terrible cries.

Q
. Is it true in an article signed by what purports to be your signature that you heard the last cry which was that of a man shouting, ‘My God, My God’?

A
. Absolutely untrue.

Address by Mr. A. Clement Edwards, M.P., Counsel for Dock Workers’ Union (Br. Inq.):

Referring to the Duff Gordon incident he said that the evidence showed that in one of the boats there were only seven seamen and five passengers. If we admitted that, this boat had accommodation for twenty-eight more passengers.

The primary responsibility for this must necessarily be placed on the member of the crew who was in charge of the boat – Symons, no conduct of anyone else in the boat, however reprehensible, relieving that man from such responsibility.

Here was a boat only a short distance from the ship, so near that the cries of those struggling in the water could be heard. Symons had been told to stand by the ship, and that imposed upon him a specific duty. It was shown in Hendricksen’s evidence that there was to the fullest knowledge of those in the boat a large number of people in the water, and that someone suggested that they should return and try to rescue them. Then it was proved that one of the ladies, who was shown to be Lady Duff Gordon, had said that the boat might be swamped if they went back, and Sir Cosmo Duff Gordon had admitted that this also represented his mental attitude at the time. He (Mr. Edwards) was going to say, and to say quite fearlessly, that a state of mind which could, while within the hearing of the screams of drowning people, think of so material a matter as the giving of money to replace kits was a state of mind which must have contemplated the fact that there was a possibility of rescuing some of these people, and the danger which might arise if this were attempted.

He was not going to say that there was a blunt, crude bargain, or a deal done with these men: ‘If you will not go back I will give you five pounds’; but he was going to suggest as a right and true inference that the money was mentioned at that time under these circumstances to give such a sense of ascendancy or supremacy to Sir Cosmo Duff Gordon in the boat that the view to which he gave expression that they should not go back would weigh more with the men than if he had given it as a piece of good advice. There were twenty-eight places on that boat and no one on board had a right to save his own life by avoiding any possible risk involved in filling the vacant places. To say the least of it, it was most reprehensible that there should have been any offer of money calculated to influence the minds of the men or to seduce them from their duty.

From the address of the Attorney-General, Sir Rufus Isaacs, K.C., M.P. (Br. Inq.):

In regard to boat No. 1, I have to make some comment. This was the Emergency boat on the starboard side, which figured somewhat prominently in the inquiry on account of the evidence which was given in the first instance by Hendricksen, and which led to the calling of Sir Cosmo Duff Gordon. Any comment I have to make in regard to that boat is, I wish to say, not directed to Sir Cosmo or his wife. For my part, I would find it impossible to make any harsh or severe comment on the conduct of any woman who, in circumstances such as these, found herself on the water in a small boat on a dark night, and was afraid to go back because she thought there was a danger of being swamped. At any rate, I will make no comment about that, and the only reason I am directing attention to No. 1 boat is that it is quite plain that it was lowered with twelve persons in it instead of forty. I am unable to say why it was that the boat was so lowered with only five passengers and seven of the crew on board, but that circumstance, I contend, shows the importance of boat drill.

As far as he knew from the evidence, no order was given as to the lowering of this boat. He regretted to say that he was quite unable to offer any explanation of it, but he could not see why the boat was lowered under the circumstances. The point of this part of the inquiry was twofold – (1) the importance of a boat drill; (2) that you should have the men ready.

No doubt if there had been proper organization there would have been a greater possibility of saving more passengers. What struck one was that no one seemed to have known what his duty was or how many persons were to be placed in the boat before it was lowered. In all cases no boat had its complement of what could be carried on this particular night. The vessel was on her first passage, and if all her crew had been engaged on the next voyage no doubt things would have been better, but there was no satisfactory organization with regard to calling passengers and getting them on deck. Had these boats had their full complement it would have been another matter, but the worst of them was this boat No 1, because the man, Symons, in charge did not exercise his duty. No doubt he was told to stand by, but he went quite a distance away. His evidence was unsatisfactory, and gave no proper account why he did not return. He only said that he ‘exercised his discretion,’ and that he was ‘master of the situation.’ There was, however, no explanation why he went away and why he did not go back except that he would be swamped. That was no explanation. I can see no justification for his not going back. From the evidence, there were no people on the starboard deck at the time. They must have been mistaken in making that statement, because, as they knew, four more boats were subsequently lowered with a number of women and children. The capacity of this boat was forty. No other boat went away with so small a proportion as compared with its capacity, and there was no other boat which went away with a larger number of the crew. I confess it is a thing which I do not understand why that boat was lowered when she was. Speaking generally, the only boats that took their full quantity were four. One had to see what explanation could be given of that. In this particular case it happened that the officers were afraid the boats would buckle. Then they said that no more women were available, and, thirdly, it was contemplated to go back. It struck one as very regrettable that the officers should have doubts in their minds on these points with regard to the capacity of the boats.

B
OAT
N
O
. 9
¹¹

No disorder when this boat was loaded and lowered.

Passengers
: Mesdames Aubert and maid (Mlle Segesser), Futrelle, Lines; Miss Lines, and second and third-class.

Men
: Two or three.

Said goodbye to wife and sank with ship:
Mr. Futrelle.

Crew
: Seamen: Haines (in charge), Wynne, Q.M., McGough, Peters; Stewards Ward, Widgery and others.

Total:
56.

Incidents

A. Haines, boatswain’s mate (Am. Inq., 755):

Officer Murdoch and witness filled boat 9 with ladies. None of the men passengers tried to get into the boats. Officer Murdoch told them to stand back. There was one woman who refused to get in because she was afraid. When there were no more women forthcoming the boat was full, when two or three men jumped into the bow. There were two sailors, three or four stewards, three or four firemen and two or three men passengers. No. 9 was lowered from the Boat Deck with sixty-three people in the boat and lowered all right. Officer Murdoch put the witness in charge and ordered him to row off and keep clear of the ship. When we saw it going down by the head he pulled further away for the safety of the people in the boat: about 100 yards away at first. Cries were heard after the ship went down. He consulted with the sailors about going back and concluded with so many in the boat it was unsafe to do so. There was no compass in the boat, but he had a little pocket lamp. On Monday morning he saw from thirty to fifty icebergs and a big field of ice miles long and large bergs and ‘growlers,’ the largest from eighty to one hundred feet high.

W. Wynne, Q.M. (Br. Inq.):

Officer Murdoch ordered witness into boat No. 9. He assisted the ladies and took an oar. He says there were fifty-six all told in the boat, forty-two of whom were women. He saw the light of a steamer – a red light first, and then a white one – about seven or eight miles away. After an interval both lights disappeared. Ten or fifteen minutes afterwards he saw a white light again in the same direction. There was no lamp or compass in the boat.

W. Ward, steward (Am. Inq., 595):

Witness assisted in taking the canvas cover off of boat No. 9 and lowered it to the level of the Boat Deck.
¹²

Officer Murdoch, Purser McElroy and Mr. Ismay were near this boat when being loaded. A sailor came along with a bag and threw it into the boat. He said he had been sent to take charge of it by the captain. The boatswain’s mate, Haines, was there and ordered him out. He got out. Either Purser McElroy or Officer Murdoch said: ‘Pass the women and children that are here into that boat.’ There were several men standing around and they fell back. There were quite a quantity of women but he could not say how many were helped into the boat. There were no children. One old lady made a great fuss and absolutely refused to enter the boat. She went back to the companionway and forced her way in and would not get into the boat. One woman, a French lady, fell and hurt herself a little. Purser McElroy ordered two more men into the boat to assist the women. When No. 9 was being lowered the first listing of the ship was noticeable.

From the rail to the boat was quite a distance to step down to the bottom of it, and in the dark the women could not see where they were stepping. Purser McElroy told witness to get into the boat to assist the women. Women were called for, but none came along and none were seen on deck at the time. Three or four men were then taken into the boat until the officers thought there were sufficient to lower away with safety.

No. 9 was lowered into the water before No. 11. There was some difficulty in unlashing the oars because for some time no one had a knife. There were four men who rowed all night, but there were some of them in the boat who had never been to sea before and did not know the first thing about an oar, or the bow from the stern. Haines gave orders to pull away. When 200 yards off, rowing was stopped for about an hour. Haines was afraid of suction and we pulled away to about a quarter of a mile from the ship. The ship went down very gradually for a while by the head. We could just see the ports as she dipped. She gave a kind of a sudden lurch forward. He heard a couple of reports like a volley of musketry; not like an explosion at all. His boat was too full and it would have been madness to have gone back. He thinks No. 9 was the fourth or fifth boat picked up by the
Carpathia
. There was quite a big lot of field ice and several large icebergs in amongst the field; also two or three separated from the main body of the field.

J. Widgery, bath steward (Am. Inq., 602):

Witness says that all passengers were out of their cabins on deck before he went up.

When he got to the Boat Deck No. 7 was about to be lowered, but the purser sent him to No. 9. The canvas had been taken off and he helped lower the boat. Purser McElroy ordered him into the boat to help the boatswain’s mate pass in women. Women were called for. An elderly lady came along. She was frightened. The boatswain’s mate and himself assisted her, but she pulled away and went back to the door (of the companionway) and downstairs. Just before they left the ship the officer gave the order to Haines to keep about 100 yards off. The boat was full as it started to lower away. When they got to the wtaer he was the only one that had a knife to cut loose the oars. He says that the balance of his testimony would be the same as that of Mr. Ward, the previous witness.

B
OAT
N
O
. 11
¹³

No disorder when this boat was loaded and lowered.

Passengers
:
Women:
Mrs. Schabert and two others of first cabin; all the rest second and third class. Fifty-eight women and children in all.

Men
: Mr. Mock, first cabin, and two others.

Crew
: Seamen: Humphreys (in charge), Brice; Stewards: Wheate, MacKay, McMicken, Thessinger, Wheelton: Fireman ——; Stewardess: Mrs. Robinson.

Total
: 70.

Incidents

W. Brice, A.B. (Am. Inq., 648):

This boat was filled from A Deck. An officer said: ‘Is there a sailor in the boat?’ There was no answer. I jumped out and went down the fall into the bow. Nobody was in the stern. I went aft and shipped the rudder. By that time the boat had been filled with women and children. We had a bit of difficulty in keeping the boat clear of a big body of water coming from the ship’s side. The after block got jammed, but I think that must have been on account of the trip not being pushed right down to disconnect the block from the boat. We managed to keep the boat clear from this body of water. It was the pump discharge. There were only two seamen in the boat, a fireman, about six stewards and fifty-one passengers. There were no women and children who tried to get into the boat and were unable to do so. There was no rush and no panic whatever. Everything was done in perfect order and discipline.