He exercised his judgment for the best. It was the judgment of a skilled and experienced man, and although others might have acted differently and perhaps more successfully, he ought not, in my opinion, to be blamed.
The whole blame for the cruel destruction of life in this catastrophe must rest solely with those who plotted and with those who committed the crime.
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
The above is called the “Annex” to the “Finding of the Court.” This latter I do not reprint for it consists only of 21 questions, the answers to which are found in the “Annex.”
A notice in “The Daily Telegraph” (London) of May 12, announced that “The Board of Trade have ordered a formal investigation into the circumstances attending the loss of the S.S. ‘Lusitania,’ and they desire to invite passengers of the ‘Lusitania’ who now are, or will shortly be in or near London, and who are able to supply evidence likely to be of value for the Inquiry, to communicate at once, either personally or by letter or telegram, to the Solicitor of the Board of Trade, at the Hotel Metropole, Northumberland Avenue, Charing-Cross, W. C.; with a view to statements being taken from them at the said address, between the hours of eleven A.M. and six P.M. during the week commencing Wednesday, the 12th instant, and ending, and including, Tuesday the 18th instant.
“The Inquiry will be conducted by the Law Officers, who may be relied upon to see that all material points consistent with the public interest will be dealt with.”
I know that some passengers did appear and did make official statements which they signed. Others laid evidence informally before the Solicitor, and while they did not sign statements, they were in London during the Official Inquiry and could have been summoned and would have testified.
The following testimony, for example, was informally offered: that the portholes were open, that the discipline of the officers and crew was not what it should have been, that the collapsible boats were not fitted with oars and were not in proper working condition, etc. None of this evidence seems to have been desired by his Lordship and his Assessors, or at least there is nothing to show that it was ever laid before them.
I do not question the sincerity of the findings of Lord Mersey’s Court, based on the evidence placed before it; but what became of this informal evidence, as quoted above, and much more that was laid before the Solicitor of the Board of Trade?
The Court finds that “the portholes were closed.” On what and on whose evidence? The above statement can hardly be made on the evidence of the Captain; for when he testified before the Coroner of Kinsale, in reply to the question, “What precautions did you take in connection with these threats?” (referring to the Notice from the German Imperial Embassy which appeared in the New York papers of May 1), he stated that “I had all the boats swung out and the bulkhead doors closed when we came within the danger zone.” (“The Daily Telegraph,” May 11.)