LOSS OF STEAMSHIP "TITANIC."
Boat Accommodation.
Motion made, and question proposed, "That this
House do now adjourn."- [Mr. Gulland.]
Mr. BOTTOMLEY: On this Motion, Mr. Speaker, I
beg to ask the indulgence of the house for a few
moments to refer to a subject which occupied some
little time at question hour this afternoon, the
importance and urgency of which is my excuse for
trespassing upon the House now. I refer to the subject
of the lack of provision made by the Board of trade
for the safety of passengers upon ocean-going liners,
especially in view of a certain recent event. In
ordinary circumstances I should have liked to have
dealt with this matter somewhat more fully, but,
having regard to the time and circumstances, I propose
only to put one or two plain questions to the
President of the Board of Trade. In no way, directly
or indirectly, do I desire, nor would it be consonant
with the general circumstances of the situation, to
utter a discourteous word against the right hon.
Gentleman, and no one appreciates more than I do
the tremendous strain with which he had to contend
in the last twelve months. But there are one or two
things connected with this matter which I desire to
impress upon the House. The first thing I say is that
the sole responsibility- and this is a question which
does not seem to be fully appreciated by the public-
for the safety of passengers upon those ocean liners
rests upon the Board of Trade. Under the Merchant
Shipping Act the whole of the Regulations as to
lifeboat accommodation, and so on, have to be dealt
with by rules made by the Board of Trade. I call
attention to this extraordinary fact, that
according to the answer given by the President of
the Board of Trade to-day, assuming his premises
to be accurate, which, with great respect, I say
they were not, the utmost requirement of the
present rules of the Board of Trade for the
life-saving accommodation of vessels like the
"Titanic" to maintain, is accommodation for 960
people and 960 people only. Against the fact
that she was authorised to carry 3,500 on this
particular voyage, she actually carried 2,200.
The right hon. Gentleman mentioned that
her total life-saving accommodation, lifeboats,
and so on, was only for 1,178. I submit, with
great respect, that the Board of Trade is
really to be censured seriously for allowing
obsolete rules to remain in force which
legalised such inadequate accommodation as that.
I would point out that in the case of cargo
boats there is more than double that protection.
Under the same Rules of the board of Trade the
smallest cargo vessel has to have lifeboat
accommodation equal to the entire number on
board on each side of the boat; and the same
applies to men-of-war, troop-ships, and
apparently to every other vessel except
these great ocean leviathans. The President
was good enough to tell me that there had
been an inquiry by the Advisory shipping
Committee of the Board of Trade to what I
conceived to be the inadequate lifeboat
accommodation of the sister vessel to the
"Titanic," namely, the "Olympic," and the
answer that was given to me was of the same
official character as that which I got to-day.
It ignored the fact that when the Regulations
of the Board of Trade did ask their advisory
Committee to look into the matter.
What I desire to put to the President of
the Board of Trade is, if that Committee did
report in July last year in regard to these
matters, why it is that until now nothing has
been done in reference to that Report. It was
apparently pigeon-holed in the usual way. The
President of the Board of Trade said a few
days ago it was referred back for further
inquiry. I want to know whether that was
before or after this catastrophe. According
to that Report- I have had the advantage of
seeing a copy of it- it does indicate the same
stupendous failure to comprehend the new
condition of things, and this is exemplified
by the existing rules of the Board of Trade.
It assumes that vessels with watertight
compartments are utterly unsinkable and it
goes further and says that all such vessels
should be exempted from any additional
life-saving appliances beyond the authorised
schedule. it goes further and says there is
no possibility of increasing what are called
the davits for this lifeboat accommodation. I
have in my hand a plan officially issued of
the boat-deck of the "Titanic," I do want the
President of the Board of trade to give his
serious attention to this important fact,
that there is room on the boat deck, even
with the system of single boats, for at least
twelve more lifeboats; and, not only that,
but when I come to read a sort of prospectus
by the White star Line of this particular
vessel, they point out that the entrance to
the boat deck is for the convenience of those
who desire to promenade in the central part
of the ship at this high level, and the
notable feature of that is the lifeboats
are so disposed that for over 200 feet of
the promenade there is an uninterrupted
view of 200 feet they have left out the
utilisation of space sufficient to provide
at least twelve further lifeboats, I say
it is a very serious thing indeed. I do
submit these rules in regard to lifeboats,
framed when the extreme tonnage was 12,000,
are altogether out of date, and I do hope
the President of the Board of Trade, in the
inquiry he is about to institute, will have
full regard to the new conditions. Either for
the purpose of breaking records or saving fuel
or time or for some other reason there is a
tendency on the part of these ocean ocean
liners utterly to ignore the recognised
dangers of the seasons of the year they should
not be permitted to go within the recognized
zone of these icebergs and ice fields. If the
President has any doubt as to the foundation
of that statement, let me remind him that since
I put that question down on the Paper it has
been officially announced that these companies
have met and have cabled out to all their
agents to ignore the northerly route all
through winter time in future, thus recognising
the justice and soundness of the suggestion put
forward.
The suggestions I venture to throw out
are: first, that the President of the Board of
Trade should have these rules and regulations
brought up to date, not upon the scale proposed
in the Report which is to be circulated with
the Votes to-morrow, and which is as obsolete
as the rules themselves, but in accordance with
the new condition of things; secondly, that he
should make it a condition of the passenger
certificates of these liners that in given
seasons they shall not go beyond a given
latitude. I make no apology to the house
for having intervened at this stage, having
regard to the grave importance of this matter.
In view of the enormity of the calamity which
has overtaken us, I think the very least
Parliament can do is to endeavour to frame
regulations which will be more in conformity
with the modern condition of things than the
obselete scale settled in the year 1890. I
hope I am not supersensitive, but I do say
this quite sincerely that, as a Member of
this Parliament, who feels that he is partly
responsible for this regulation, personally,
I shudder at the thought of what must have
been the reflections of the victims of this
disaster when they looked wistfully and
hopelessly for the lifeboats which were not
there, and of what they thought of the
British Legislature, which is responsible
for their safety. Something we said a day
or two ago by the right hon. Gentleman the
Member for East Worcester (Mr. Austen
Chamberlain) as to whether the Members of
this House were shareholders or directors
of the British Empire. My own view is that
we are all directors of the British Empire,
and that the Ministry are simply the managing
directors; and do not take this matter
seriously in hand, we in this House should
take action.
Colonel PHILIPPS: I wish to ask the
right hon. Gentleman, in view of the absence
of information from the "Carpathia," whether
he can see his way to take steps so as to
relieve the long drawn out agony suffered
by the relatives and friends of those
on board the ship. So far not a single name
has come over, and it is felt there must be
some hitch. I would beg the right hon.
Gentleman to telegraph to-night to the
Consul-General at New York instructing him
to remit at once a complete list of the crew
saved. I feel that this is the only right
thing to do.
Mr. COOPER: I desire to support the hon.
Member for South Hackney in impressing on the
Board of Trade the necessity for taking some
immediate action for the protection of the
liners that are present crossing the Atlantic.
I understand there is an important question
which it is desired to ask to-night, and I
will therefore be excessively brief. But I
would remind the House that the right hon.
Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade
this afternoon in reply to a question suggested
that it might very well be left to the
discretion of the shipping companies themselves
to deal with this matter. I venture to say to
him that, on that principle, it would be
infinitely better for this country if he
would leave the boating accommodation also
to the shipping companies, because in the
case of the "Titanic" there are actually
davits and deck space for far more boats
than the Board of Trade regulations insist
upon, thus showing that in this matter the
shipowners are more progressive than the
Board of Trade itself. There is one other
matter on which the President of the Board
of trade must seriously consider how far
he can properly show an inclination to take
immediate action. we are led to understand
through the Press, which I admit is by no
means free from mistakes in their cables,
but which in this matter i think may be
trusted, that the American Senate and Congress
have already dealt in rather a strong manner
with the question. It is said that they are
even considering the necessity for abrogating
certain treaties between the United states and
this country in order to enable them to remain
free to make their own regulations concerning
the boats of nationalities that touch their
ports. they can only do that because they regard
the competancy of the Board of Trade as
insufficient to meet what they think is
necessary for their own people who are
travelling on these boats. I urge the President
of the Board of Trade to seriouslt consider
whether he should not at once issue regulations
compelling the steamers to take a safer course
without delay.
The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE
(Mr. BUXTON): In regard to the remarks of
the hon. Gentleman who last spoke, what I
said at question time was that it appeared
to me that without further information at
my disposal, or without expert advice in
regard to this matter, it would be idle
for me to lay down propositions such as
those the hon. Member asked me to lay down.
It is clear- apart from the greatest disaster
which has befallen the country that this is
a matter in which it would not be an advantage
to the shipping community in general, if I
were to suddenly step in without due knowledge.
As to the points raised by the hon. Member who
first spoke, I take full responsibility as
President of the Board of Trade for what that
Board may have done or left undone in past
years, but I venture to say that the long
answer I read earlier in the evening showed
that, at all events, we have of late been
alive to the necessity for taking further
action in regard to this very matter. We
have for some time past making most careful
inquiries into it with the assistance of
the Advisory Committee who had the best
knowledge at their disposal, and after
considering their recommendations to our
expert officers, we have come to the
conclusion- apart from this calamity-
that we should suggest more stringent
conditions than even the advisory
committee itself has recommended. the
hon. Gentleman for south Hackney (Mr.
Bottomley) seems to suggest that there
has been delay between the date of the
report of the advisory Committee last
July and the present time. that is not
so. The delay has been from this cause,
that our expert advisers throughout the
country have been having experiments made
in regard to lifeboats, the carrying
capacity of ships, and other matters of
that sort of the most practical character.
They have had this done on the sea with
boats and so on. That has all taken time.
In this matter we were anxious in moving
to move with certainty, to move with
knowledge, and to move in the right
direction. My hon. Friend insinuates
that this matter was referred back to
the Advisory Committee because of the
sinking of the "Titanic." There is no
truth in that. These matters have been
considered, and we have been in consultation
with the Advisory Committee and the experts
to see how soon, in what direction, and how
far we should move. I venture also to say that
I think we must in this sense of not doing
anything- but I think we also require to have
before us such evidence as we can obtain in
reference to the calamity itself. I pointed
this out to the house to day, and I think
they assented that while, I admit, we were
going to propose greater boat accommodation
for these larger ships, I will undertake to
say that not a single expert throughout the
country, nobody who has given this matter any
consideration at all, would have for a moment
said that the fact of a large ship of this sort
being built in water-tight compartments was not
a factor in its safety, and therefore that such
a ship as that would really require, in to its
size, a smaller proportion of boats than those
without water-tight bulkheads. unfortunately
this calamity has shown that these water-tight
bulkheads cannot be relied upon. Therefore,
the question has become a new one, but it is
not the desire of the Board of Trade to shirk
either their responsibility or the care that
they intend to give it. I hope the House will
be satisfied with the assurance on behalf of
the Board of Trade. My hon. Friend (Colonel
Ivor Philipps) asked me what further news we
had in reference to the "Titanic." I have
been in communication more than once to-day
with the White Star Company here and in
Liverpool. They desire to assure me that,
so far as they are concerned, every item
of information they have received has been
published. there has been some idea in the
minds of some that they have been keeping
back information. that is not so. Apparently
the atmospheric conditions have been very
bad and wireless telegraphy has not been
working properly. Just now they telephoned
to me that they have received the following
telegram from New York:-
"White Star 'Carpathia' will not be
docked until tomorrow morning. Officials
explain that heavy weather will prevent
captain bringing 'Carpathia' up to dock
in the dark. List of names is being prepared,
but atmospheric conditions have been very bad."
That is the latest information that I have.
Colonel IVOR PHILIPPS: Will the right hon.
Gentleman telgraph to the consul-general in New
York, and ask him to telegraph direct to the
Mayor of Southampton the names of survivors?
Mr. BUXTON: I will certainly do so if the
list of names is not available tomorrow, as I
understand it is now coming in. I will certainly
do so to-morrow. there will be nothing gained at
the moment.
Mr. BONAR LAW: I entirely agree with the
general view which has been expressed by the
President of the Board of Trade. we all feel
at a time like this the extent of such a
calamity, but I think it would really be in
every way undesirable that in a panic we
should set to work making arrangements which
would simply disturb trade without giving any
security, and I would suggest to Members of
the House who feel as we all do how serious
this is- for undoubtedly a new factor has
arisen, because everyone was under the
impression that the water-tight compartments
made the ship unsinkable- that it would be
much more useful that we should direct
attention to this matter two or three
months hence, when people have begun to
cease to think about it, and make sure
then that precautions are taken to prevent
such a thing happening again.
