Titanic and the Mystery Ship

by Senan Molony

  7516. You are sure that is what he said – ‘She looks very queer out of the water?’ — Yes.

  7517. Did he say what he meant? — I looked at her through the glasses after that, and her lights did not seem to be natural.

  7518. [The Commissioner] What do you mean by that? — When a vessel rolls at sea her lights do not look the same.

  7519. But there was no water to cause her to roll, was there? You were not rolling? — No.

  7520. There was no sea to cause her to roll? — No, Sir.

  7521. [The Solicitor General] He made this observation to you. Did you look at her then through your glasses? — Yes.

  7522. What did you see? — She seemed as if she had a heavy list to starboard.

  7523. She seemed to have a list, and you thought a list to starboard? — Yes.

  Gibson has described a ship with a queer, unnatural appearance, furthermore with a list to starboard. What did Stone say, on the other hand?

  7988. Did you say this to Gibson, ‘Have a look at her now; it looks queer; she looks to have a big side out of the water?’ — No, I did not say she had a big side out of the water; he remarked it to me.

  7989. He remarked that to you? — Yes.

  7990. Did you say, ‘Have a look at her now; it looks queer?’ — That is at the time when I told him the lights appeared to be altering their position with regard to one another. Yes.

  7991. Did you think it looked queer? — I merely thought it was a funny change of her lights, that was all. That was before I had looked at her through the binoculars.

  7992. In view of the fact that this vessel had been sending up rockets, and in view of the fact that you said it looks queer, did not you think at the time that that ship was in distress? — No.

  7993. Are you sure? — I did not think the ship was in distress at the time.

  7994. It never occurred to you? — It did not occur to me because if there had been any grounds for supposing the ship would have been in distress the Captain would have expressed it to me.

  7995. [The Commissioner] Never mind about the Captain. You are being asked about what you thought yourself. Do you mean to tell us that neither you nor Gibson expressed an opinion that there was something wrong with that ship? — No, not wrong with the ship, but merely with this changing of her lights.

  7996. Well, about this changing of her lights? — That is when I remarked that the lights looked queer. The lights, I said, not the ship.

  7997. [still Commissioner] The lights are what I call part of the ship. The whole thing, lights and all, make up the ship. You want me to believe, do you, that, notwithstanding these rockets, neither you nor Gibson thought there was anything wrong on board that ship; you want me to understand that? — Yes.

  Stone clarifies that it was Gibson alone who claimed to have detected the ship having ‘a big side out of the water’. Gibson indeed made the shocking claim that the ship seemed to have ‘a heavy list to starboard’ (question 7522). Gibson in evidence first said he did not know why she appeared to have a list, but was very clear what led him to that conclusion:

  7636. You thought she had a list…what was there about her lights to make you think that? — Her side lights seemed to be higher out of the water.

  7637. The side lights seemed to be higher out of the water? — Yes.

  7639. And you say that watching her, you thought that her red side light did not stay at the same level, but got higher? — Yes.

  7640. That was your impression was it? — Yes.

  [The Commissioner] That would make a list to starboard?

  7641. [The Solicitor General] Is that why you thought she had got a list to starboard? — Yes.

  7642. You thought her red light was rising out of the water, and so you assumed that the other side was dropping? — Yes.

  A credible explanation, were it not for one thing. Gibson, in his original statement, composed on board the Californian in his own hand, stated: ‘She fired another rocket [Gibson’s second of three]. Shortly after that I observed that her side light had disappeared…’ This is the port (red) side light, the light that he had previously said he was able to see. He and Stone only ever saw one side light. Both say they never saw green. Now Gibson is telling the court that not only has the red one not disappeared, but is rising steadily upwards!

  7515. What had you noticed between one o’clock and twenty minutes past one, looking at her through your glasses? — The Second Officer remarked to me, ‘Look at her now; she looks very queer out of the water’.

  This is when Gibson says she seemed to have ‘a heavy list to starboard’. But Gibson wrote in his earliest account of this red side light disappearing shortly afterwards. It cannot just ‘disappear’ if it has been rising high because of a list to starboard. A list to port, not starboard, would cause the red light to disappear quickly, as Gibson describes, but in such a case it is the green light that should go higher. And it is no defence to imagine that it depends on which side one is looking at, because the red and green side lights were introduced for this purpose. Red will always be the port side of a ship under observation, no matter if it appears on the right hand side of the observer. So Gibson is very close to appearing to see both a red light ‘rising’ and ‘disappearing’ simultaneously! Such doublethink is perplexing in a witness, and the twenty-year-old soon becomes even more accommodating to his questioners:

  7687. You have told us about this red light, that you thought it was higher out of the water? — Yes.

  7688. Did you look to see whether these after-lights seemed higher up out of the water, or lower in the water? — I noticed them all at the same time.

  7689. What, the red light and the others too? — Yes.

  7690. And do you mean that the white light seemed higher out of the water as well as the red light? — Yes.

  So Gibson sees the ship tilting significantly to starboard (raising her red port side light), but also tilting not just from left to right, but from stern to bows – raising the after-lights higher too, and presumably going lower at the bows. This double-effect, ‘all at the same time’ in Gibson’s words, seems an extremely unlikely proposition, like an elephant tipping forward with three legs off the ground.

  Particularly when one considers what AB Edward Buley of the Titanic said in his evidence about the White Star vessel’s red light being submerged when he left in lifeboat No.10, whose departure has been timed at 1.10 a.m.: ‘Her [Titanic’s] port bow light was under water when we were lowered’ (US Inquiry, p.606). And Buley is an extremely accurate eyewitness, as we learned earlier.

  There is also something deeply worrying about the alacrity with which Gibson agreed with a suggestion from counsel (questions 7636–9) that it was a red light that had been rising. Gibson previously spoke only of side lights (in the plural) getting higher. Anyway, enough of Gibson. What did Stone, the senior officer on duty, think? His version of events certainly casts doubt on Gibson’s account, as he did not believe there was any ‘list to starboard’; indeed, he did not perceive any list at all:

  8051. Did you notice this ship had a list? — No, I did not.

  8052. Are you sure? — Yes.

  8053. Did you tell Gibson to look through his glasses, and that the ship had a list? — No. He remarked to me that it looked as if she had a list to starboard.

  8054. Did you look? — I looked.

  8055. [The Commissioner] Did you notice it? — I did not. I remarked to him that it was owing very probably to her bearing, and her lights were changing possibly. She had no list as far as I could see.

  Stone was seeing a moving ship. That is what was causing the vessel under observation to change her lights, he said. Slightly earlier, Stone is questioned about rockets and bearings:

  8037. Then you had seen [rockets] from this steamer? — A steamer that is in distress does not steam away from you, my Lord. [A perfectly reasonable presumption]

  8038. You saw these before this steamer steamed away from you? — I saw them at the sa
me time the ship started to alter her bearings.

  8039. [Mr Scanlan] But for a long time while this ship was stationary like your own, you noticed at frequent intervals that she was sending up rocket after rocket? — No.

  8042. What do you mean by saying that you did not see them coming in quick succession one after another? — I said that the ship was altering her bearing from the time she showed her first rocket. She commenced altering her bearing by the compass.

  8045. Was she moving? — She started to move as soon as I saw the first rocket. She was stationary up to that time. She was stationary by our compass, at least so far as I could tell.

  8046. Do you mean to say she was swinging about? — She was not swinging so far as I could tell, she was steaming away.

  8048. When did you send word to the Captain that you noticed her steaming away?

  8049. [The Commissioner] It is 2 o’clock? — At 10 minutes past 1. I reported to the Master that she was altering her bearings, which was the same thing.

  8050. [Mr Butler Aspinall] Altering her bearings did not mean steaming away? — I do not see how two ships can alter their bearings when stopped. [A landlubber, becoming the third questioner to assault Stone, has his lack of maritime understanding exposed]

  [The Commissioner] You need not press this any further. [They give up the unequal fight in attempting to get Stone to agree that his steaming-away ship was instead stationary]

  Here, finally, is Stone’s clear impression once more stitched into the record:

  7938. Was the steamer altering her bearing to your vessel during that period of time? — Yes, from the time I saw the first rocket.

  7939. The first of the eight that you have told us of? — The second – excepting the first flash, which I was not sure about.

  7940. You say you saw the steamer altering her bearing with regard to you? — She bore first SSE and she was altering her bearing towards the south towards west. [She may have adjusted her course in steaming away, but not necessarily]

  7941. Under way apparently? — Yes.

  7942. During that 20 minutes did you notice anything which you would call funny or odd about her lights? — Yes.

  7943. What did you notice? — On one occasion I noticed the lights looked rather unnatural, as if some were being shut in and others being opened out; the lights appeared to be changing their position – the deck lights.

  7944. Her deck lights? — Yes, and I lost sight of her red side light.

  7944A. That would be consistent with her altering her heading? — Yes.

  7945. What was there funny about it? — Merely that some lights were being shut in and others exposed and I remarked to Gibson that the lights looked peculiar, unnatural, but when I took the glasses and brought her under close observation I took it to be due to the fact that very likely she was porting for some iceberg close at hand and was coming back on her course again, showing her other lights, the original lights.

  Again, in Stone’s view the ‘unnatural’ or ‘peculiar’ changes of lights are consistent with the steamer steaming away. At question 7995 above, he states that neither he nor Gibson thought there was something ‘wrong with the ship, but merely with this changing of her lights’. He repeats (question 7996): ‘The lights, I said, not the ship’. And Stone confirms Gibson’s disappearing red side light, saying he lost sight of it – because the vessel had turned (altered her heading). This certainly seems a more logical account than Gibson’s red light rising and rising into the air, only to disappear suddenly. Stone, on this sole point, lacks Gibson’s many contradictions. Thus Stone is not particularly concerned, merely puzzled, about the unfolding oddities. No alarm bells ring at any time for him, even when he later concedes that ‘a ship is not going to fire rockets at sea for nothing’.

  7934. Did anything of that sort pass? Did you say something of this sort to Gibson: ‘A ship is not going to fire rockets at sea for nothing?’ — Yes, I may possibly have passed that expression to him.

  Stone was not even concerned enough to keep the steamer constantly at the forefront of their watch:

  7986. And were you talking about the ship all the time until she disappeared? — No.

  7987. Are you sure? — Yes.

  Stone had already told Lord the steamer was beginning to move off. He may have felt he had little to add. We return to Gibson in the witness box:

  7525. What was there to show you [that she appeared to have a list to starboard]? — Her lights did not seem to look like as they did do before when I first saw them.

  [The Commissioner] What was the difference?

  7526. [The Solicitor General] Could you describe them at all, Gibson? — No, Sir.

  7527. You have told us what the officer said to you. Did you think yourself when you looked at her through the glasses that something was wrong? — We had been talking about it together.

  7529. I should like you to tell me what were you saying to each other? — He remarked to me that a ship was not going to fire rockets at sea for nothing.

  7530. Who said that? — The Second Officer.

  7532. I daresay you agreed with him? — Yes.

  7533. What took place after that between you and him? — We were talking about it all the time, Sir, [contradicts Stone at 7986] till five minutes past two, when she disappeared.

  7535. [The Commissioner] Then do I understand from you that the Second Officer came to the conclusion that this was a ship in distress? — No, Sir, not exactly.

  7536. What do you mean by ‘not exactly’? The Second Officer said to you, ‘A ship does not fire up rockets for nothing?’ — Yes, Sir.

  7537. Did not that convey to you that the ship was, in his opinion, in distress? — Not exactly in distress, Sir.

  7538. What then? — That everything was not all right with her.

  7539. [The Solicitor General] In trouble of some sort? — Yes, Sir.

  We have already seen how Stone denies noticing anything about the vessel’s red side light being higher out of the water, or drawing Gibson’s attention to it. Stone denied it twice, and here is the other reference:

  7946. Is this right, that during this 20 minutes Gibson said this to you: ‘Look at her red light; is not there something funny about it?’ Did anything of that sort happen? — Not her red light that I remember.

  7947. Gibson has been here, and he told us that he directed your attention to the red light. If you do not remember it, say so? — I do not remember his saying anything about her red side light at all.

  Gibson had said:

  7642. You thought her red light was rising out of the water…? — Yes.

  7643. Did you call the Second Officer’s attention to that? — Yes; he remarked it at the time; he told me to look through the glasses at it.

  7644. He told you to look through the glasses at that very thing? — Yes.

  But Gibson later flatly contradicts himself on this issue: ‘Did he [Stone] speak to you about her port light? — No’ (7653). So once more Stone’s account stands out clearly, such as it is, whereas Gibson’s is riven with his own contradictions. It would appear Gibson has gone on something of a ‘solo run’ in relation to his higher red light and the list to starboard. It should be noted that Gibson does not mention anything about a list to starboard in his original statement composed on board the Californian. With his mind so fresh, would he have left out such dynamite detail? There is no evidence that Gibson on the night in question voiced any meaningful misgivings to his senior officer, Stone. Of course, the twenty year-old apprentice had little experience, and Stone would likely give his opinions little value in any case. Gibson instead appeared to have confined himself to musings about the stranger’s odd changes of lights, perhaps suggesting (question 7538) that everything was not all right with her. Things were very different on the Titanic when Gibson was seeing his ‘tramp steamer’ possibly listing to starboard…

  A LIST TO PORT

  The Titanic consensus is that there was a noticeable list to port:


  [Mr Cotter] Before she sank, my Lord; we have evidence that there was a list to port.

  [The Attorney General] There is no doubt there is some [such evidence] already, and there is a good deal more to come.

  Such as…

  Second Officer Charles Lightoller (question 13852): ‘she had a pretty heavy list to port’.

  Harold Bride (question 16551): ‘There was a heavy list to port’.

  Thomas Ranger (question 4056): ‘A slight list to port’.

  Frank Morris (question 5475): ‘A list to port’.

  Frederick Scott (question 5651): ‘The port side was where she had listed over’.

  Charles Joughin (question 5989): ‘Yes, a list to port’.

  Samuel Rule (question 6502): ‘A list to which side? — To port’.

  Edward Brown (question 10530): ‘The ship took a list to port’.

  Alfred Crawford (question 17945): ‘A list to port? — Yes’.

  John Hardy (US Inquiry, p.589): ‘A heavy list to port’.

  Bruce Ismay (US Inquiry, p.965): ‘The ship had quite a list to port’.

  AB Edward Buley (US Inquiry, p.606): ‘Her port bow light was under water when we were lowered’.

  Even the Commissioner (question 11443) at one point interjected: ‘I suppose you will have some theory to explain the great list to port that there was, according to the evidence, on this ship before she went down?’

  Yet even Gibson, with his frankly astonishing ‘list to starboard’, did not feel the need to rouse the captain about a listing nearby ship, nor now think that the rockets he saw indicated distress:

  7696. Did you know when the rockets were being sent up that they were being sent up as danger signals? — No.