... Mr. Morton: I look upon the
question of the "Titanic" and our merchant
service as one of the most important
questions with which we can deal. This
country, we are told, owns more than half
the merchant shipping of the world, and
if that is not worth a little more attention
I do not know what is. I do not want this
to be considered a party question in which
only one side is concerned. I listened to
the pretty strong speech of the hon.
Member for Gravesend (Sir G. Parker), and I
agreed practically with all he said, for I
do not want to make this a party question.
Nor do we necessarily want to make a
personal attack upon the President of the
Board of Trade, but as his Department is
concerned, we cannot help criticising it.
This is not a party question, but one
which is raised in the interests of the
whole country. What I wish to call
attention to is the question of the
certificates which the Board of Trade gave
the "Titanic". I put a question about a
fortnight ago to the Prime Minister as
to who were protecting and looking after
the interests of the British public at
this inquiry, seeing that the Board of
Trade itself is charged with having given
a certificate as to the complete
equipment of this vessel the "Titanic",
for 3,400 passengers and crew. Fortunately
the number on board was 2,204; still,
there was only boats for 700; yet they
got a certificate from the Board of Trade,
which most of us who travel have been
stuck up in the vessel, that she is
properly equipped for the full number of
passengers. I do not blame the White Star
Line so much as I do the Board of Trade
in this matter. I noticed, according to
the papers, that in America they actually
claimed that having the Board of Trade
certificate as to their equipment they
had done all that was necessary. I am
not surprised, but that brings it back
to this, that the Board of Trade is
responsible for the equipment of that
vessel. I am afraid somebody is
responsible, directly or indirectly,
for the loss of some 1,600 lives. The
Prime Minister said that the law
Officers were going to look after the
interests of the public concerned in
the matter. So far as I can see the
Attorney-General is representing the
Board of Trade. At that time the
Attorney-General said that the question
of the certificate, and the action or
want of action of the Board of Trade
was included in the twenty-six points,
I think, that were mentioned by the
Attorney-General. So far as I can see
it is only indirectly included. I have
not been able to find out when that
question is coming on. I am sorry the
Attorney-General is not here, so that
he could have given us some information
on the matter. It is a curious thing
about that question that I put that by
some extraordinary means it was not
allowed to get into the newspapers,
either question or answer. It did
appear on the "Globe", a very
respectable newspaper, and in the
"Scotsman", another very respectable
newspaper; but so far as I know, those
are the only papers. I complained to
the "Times" and some other newspapers
for not putting the question in. The
information given me was that they
were very sorry, and the only way
they could account for it was that
the reply to the question had not
been sent upstairs in the usual way.
Mr. BUXTON: A copy of every single
answer is automatically sent to the Press.
There is no discrimination, and there was
no desire to suppress my hon. Friend's
question.
Mr. MORTON: I did not put the question
to which I refer to the right. hon.
Gentleman, and therefore I do not want to
bring him into it. He has always sent me
a typed copy of answers. This was a
question to the Prime Minister. Where he
is I do not know, but, at any rate, I do
know this, that I was by those newspapers
that the answer was not sent up in the
usual way, and it was not sent to me in
the usual way.
Mr. HUNT: I do not know if the hon.
Member is aware that, so far as I know,
the answers of the Prime Minister are
never sent to Members.
Mr. MORTON: I am very much obliged
to my young friend. I never heard before,
except on this particular occasion, that
the Prime Minister was less courteous than
other Members of the Government. I think
I have always received copies of his
replies before. I am sure that that was
a very important question of mine, and I
am sorry we have not heard more about it.
It appears to me that at the inquiry a
great deal of time is being frittered away
on subjects which have no great concern
to those poor fellows who are dead and
gone. What I want to know, and to find out
somehow, is how that vessel was allowed to
go out. We are told that there has been no
alteration in the regulations for a
number of years, and that the regulations
only applied to vessels of 10,000 tons and
upwards, but practically to those of 10,000
tons, and that the boats required were for
that size and no other. Every year we have
been having bigger ships, such as the
"Lusitania", the "Mauretania", the "Olympic",
and others of great size, and yet we are
told there has been no regulation made at
all to meet those cases. I am told that
the Board of Trade under present Acts of
Parliament can make any regulations it likes,
the only condition being that they must lie
on the Table of the House for a certain
number of days. Therefore, there is no
question at all why the Board should not
have made all the necessary alterations to
meet the case of the big vessels. I am not
attacking shipowners at all. I think they
are a credit to the country and they have
done good work all over the world. I am
talking about the certificate of the Board
of Trade. With regard to wireless
telegraphy, it has been found that the
offices on board ship close about half-past
eleven or twelve o'clock at night. The
Board of Trade should have known this years
ago. We have no explanation why the Board
have not troubled to see that a proper staff
was provided so that these offices could be
kept open day and night. It is extraordinary
that they should be closed about twelve
o'clock. As most of the accidents occur
during the night, it would not matter so
much if the offices were closed during the
day, provided they were open at night for
the protection of those who require
assistance. We have not yet been told
whether any regulations are to be made and
forced upon the shipowners requiring
wireless telegraphy offices in ships to be
open day and night. Wireless telegraphy
has been of great use to shipping, and,
no doubt, can be made of still greater use
in the future. We are entitled to a much
longer time to consider these matters.
Personally I wish we paid more attention
than we do to these trade and business
interests. We do not want to make shipping
matters political or party questions at
all. What we do want to see is that we
have an efficient Board of Trade and
efficient officials. We are quite willing
to pay the Board of Trade. We very
recently largely increased their salaries,
but from a long experience I have found
that it rather does harm than good to
increase salaries, because the moment you
do so those concerned want more holidays
to spend the money; consequently the
service is not so good as it might be.
I heard the President of the Board of
Trade say to-day that some Committee was
responsible, and he added, "as well as
himself". He added, further, that
Parliament was responsible.
And, it being Eleven of the clock,
the Chairman left the Chair to make
his report to the House.
Committee report Progress; to sit
again to-morrow (Wednesday).
