Evening Post. THURSDAY, AUGUST 1, 1912. LESSONS OF THE TITANIC

Evening Post, Volume LXXXIV, Issue 28, 1 August 1912, Page 6

Evening Post. THURSDAY, AUGUST 1, 1912. LESSONS OF THE TITANIC

The Times, without concurring with all the findings of the Court of Enquiry regarding the loss of tho Titanic, nevertheless declares the report of tho President to be "masterly, lucid, dispassionate, and firm." A finer combination of epithets could hardly have been desired by the compiler of a judicial document. There were those who said at the outset of the British enquiry that it would, of course, be conducted with moro' regard I'ov dignity, decorum, and fait- play than that of tho American Senate's Committee, . but that the vested interests concerned would be too strong in the conservative atmosphere of England to allow of tho matter being probed to tho bottom with the thoroughness that distinguished the rougii and ready methods characteristic of the United

States. Neither the progress of the investigation nor the conclusions arrived at have justified such misgivings. The British Court of Enquiry has been unflinching in the thoroughness of its methods, though it has strictly observed the judicial conventions and declined to presume even a. living man to be a criminal before he has been so proved. With regard to the dead, is it possible that the Court has allowed mercy to temper its judgment too much? Ite principal finding is that " tho disaster was due to the excessive speed of the Titanic, which was travelling at 21 knots, after having been warned during the day and evening of the neighbourhood of ice." Yet with regard to the brave sailor who thus raced his ship to destruction, the finding is that " Captain Smith was grievously mistaken in not reducing speed, though not negligent." This seems to us just the sort of moral and logical " Yes-No " with which juries love to evade difficult point* when they escape to the region where they are free from a judge's control. To drive a ship at the rate of 21 knots .against an iceberg, after receiving warning* that there are icebergs about, is, to tho ordinary mind, clear evidence of recklessness, and recklessness is not merely negligence, but negligence of a. gross type. Yet the Court finds Captain Smith to have been "grievously mistaken," but not negligent. How are we to reconcile tho contradiction and resolve the paradox? Some light is thrown upon the point by various remarks that fell from Lord Mersey in the course of the enquiry. At one stage he asked whether.it was usual in these enquiries to bring in a finding of negligence against a dead man, and suggested that it should be, if at all, very x charily done, as the accused could not appear to defend himself. The practice of other shipmasters in tho neighbourhood of ice was on another occasion suggested by the President as relevant to the enquiry. "They may all have done the same thing," . said the Attorney-General, "but still it is v .... . running an unnecessary risk, in view of the number of passengers carried." The President replied : "Of course you may imagine that every man in the trade has been negligent for the last twenty years, but I should be much more disposed to say ithat a man who hae followed a practice which has existed so long is guilty of an error of judgment." Thus it is that Captain Smith's blunder is held not to be negligence and placed in the minor category. The point, however, on which The Times records its dissent relates to the principal finding. The collision resulted, it declares, as much from the course steered as from the speed, and the steering necessarily depended upon the look-out, which the Court finds to have been inadequate. "If the object had been sighted in time," says The Times, "the speed was immaterial." That is, of course, beyond question. As, the Attorney -General said during his gross-examination of a witness : "Assuming you can see far enough to get out of the way at whatever speed you are going, you can go at whatever speed you like." A safe speed is a ratio between the actual rate of motion and the effectiveness of the look-out, and it may be, that the principal finding states the matter too absolutely. The recommendation, by the way, of a better lookout only increases one's wonder that there is no finding of negligence. It is unfortunately impossible within the limits of the space at our disposal to ' discuss the many other findings and recommendations of importance, but a few ' salient points may be mentioned. The acquittal, from moral blame of Mr. Ismay, who was so outrageously defamed by the yellow press of America, will be generally welcomed. The finding .that the third-class passengers were not unfairly treated will excite an even deeper and more widespread satisfaction. With regard to life-belts and rafts the report gives the Board of Trade plenty of material for thought and action, and its recommendation that some of the moro radical questions of construction ehould I be referred to an international conference is likely to take shape promptly in ! view of the similar suggestion previously made by the Kaiser. Lord Mersey and his colleagues have evidently done their work admirably. It remains for our own and other seafaring nations to see that their recommendations aa"e promptly acted on.