by Senan Molony
I have no ill will toward the Captain or any officer of the ship, and I am losing a profitable berth by making this statement. I am actuated by the desire that no Captain who refuses or neglects to give aid to a vessel in distress should be able to hush up the men. Signed Ernest Gill.
There are a large number of difficulties with Gill’s self-serving account. The main problems are listed below:
His vessel is moving at full speed before midnight at a time when Groves and Lord had both observed their nearby steamer to be stopped (all three are citing Californian time).
She is showing a lot of light whereas Groves said her lights had all gone out 15 minutes earlier.
She’s also ‘broadside’, whereas Groves agreed with a suggestion that his steamer had turned, shutting in her lights.
Gill saw the vessel going along ‘full speed’ towards an ice barrier, yet it was no concern of his! Lord, Stone, Gibson and Groves’ steamer was doing no such thing.
A ship at full speed from a distance of ten miles will look stationary. One minute is not sufficient time to detect speed.
Gill reports hearsay that the ‘Third Officer had reported rockets’. The Third Officer was Groves. He neither saw any rockets nor reported them. The Second Officer did.
Gill sees white rockets in the same place as he had seen his large passenger steamer half an hour earlier. The steamer has gone. He concludes this must mean ‘a vessel in distress’ – not necessarily the vessel he had seen, which he implies has departed – yet Stone and Gibson continued to see their vessel long thereafter.
He does not feel the need to respond in any constructive fashion to what he concludes must be a vessel in distress and in fact tells no-one.
Gibson did not notify the captain initially as Gill thinks; Stone did. Gill is again reporting erroneous hearsay.
Gibson was not told by Captain Lord to Morse the stranger. Not once, let alone twice.
The entire crew had been talking among themselves about the disregard of rockets, says Gill. He sees no irony in his own disregard of the rockets.
Unperturbed by this, he urged other members of the crew to protest the captain’s alleged conduct based solely on the garbled gossip he had heard.
He is certain the Titanic was less than 20 miles from the Californian but offers no basis on which to distrust the opinion of his officers except his own linkage of the rockets to the steamer he had seen earlier. Despite the fact that the rockets had appeared in a place left behind half an hour earlier by a passenger steamer going at full speed!
He has no ill will towards the captain, yet attempted to organise something akin to a mutiny.
He says he is losing a profitable berth by making the statement. Yet Gill is not being frank. He made the equivalent of nearly two years’ salary in one lump sum with his sensational allegations. His pay had been £5 10s per month, the equivalent in 1912 of $27.50.
He claims that $500 was not what actuated him, but a desire to punish anyone who neglects to give aid to a vessel in distress. Yet Gill himself did not offer even the basic aid to a ‘vessel in distress’ by checking that the responsible officers of the watch were aware of it.
It is not even true (line one) that he was making his first voyage on the Californian. His name appears on the ship’s articles for the 29 November 1911 Atlantic crossing, returning to Britain on 15 January 1912. His previous ship on that occasion was cited as the White Star Line’s Cedric.
Gill’s remarkable self-centredness jumps out from every line of his official affidavit, just as it does from Evans’ evidence about him. One might find it nauseating that he should dress up such self-interest in the guise of someone motivated solely by concern for his fellow humanity.
He did not interact with the officers of the watch that night, but says he spoke to his cabin mate. Gill swore that he woke his bunkmate William Thomas immediately after midnight and told him that he could see a big vessel, perhaps a German, going along at full speed.
Unfortunately, William Thomas disagrees! A ‘highly indignant’ Thomas told the Boston Herald (26 April) that Gill had only mentioned that his own ship was stopped in the ice. No mention of the speeding big German!
‘I don’t believe he could see a ship ten miles off if there was one, because the change from the engine room to the deck partly blinds a man’, said Thomas, who was called to the British Inquiry but never put into the box to give evidence (unlike Gill). Thomas added, in relation to Gill’s other claims: ‘I think [he] would have told me if he had seen rockets’. Gill duly followed up on his US Inquiry outing by telling his story to the British Inquiry. It is summarised here: ‘Just before midnight I saw a large steamer. She was too large. Several groups of lights. A passenger boat. She was a good distance off…’ (questions 18136–18137). But in his US affidavit he said the steamer was ‘about ten miles away’. He now says: ‘not more than ten miles and probably less’ (question 18137). Why is he bringing her closer? He adds: ‘I supposed she would be moving’ (question 18138). He supposed she would be moving? In America he said she was going full speed. Now he cannot tell?
18138. Did you notice whether she appeared to be moving? — I did not stand to look at the ship [interesting… in his American affidavit he says: ‘I watched her for fully a minute’] but I supposed she would be moving.
Gill squirms when tested on the movement question again:
18208. Was the vessel that carried these lights moving? — Well, I did not stay long enough to see whether she was moving or in what direction she was going. She was there, she was a ship passing, and I had no interest in her…
18209. You could not make out whether she was moving or not? — No.
Remember, in America, Gill had said the vessel was at ‘full speed’. The summary of his British evidence continues: ‘I called my mate [to take over engine room duty]. Talked to him. Went back on deck and smoked a cigarette. Then couldn’t see anything of the steamer at all… She had steamed away. She had either steamed away or I do not know what she had done’ (18150–18155). This was between 12.40 and 1 a.m. Then he was ‘looking around’ and saw a falling star. He paid no attention. Five full minutes went by. And then: ‘I could see… what was unmistakably a rocket’ (18157). At question 18162, he was asked: ‘Did you watch for any more?’. Gill replied: ‘I stayed for about 3 or 4 minutes after that, but it was extremely cold, and I was just dressed in a thin flannel suit and I did not care to stay any longer on deck. I went below’. Gill said in his US evidence: ‘I had been on deck about 10 minutes’, having a smoke when the first rocket appeared. Ten minutes in a ‘thin flannel suit’ in the perishing cold? He took that rocket to be a falling star and thought nothing of it. Five minutes then went by (making a total of fifteen minutes on deck) before he saw an unmistakable rocket, followed by another ‘3 or 4 minutes’, for which time he stays on deck. So he spends a minimum of eighteen minutes on deck having his smoke – an eighteen-minute after-midnight smoke in his thin threads on a freezing deck. Is this likely?
Remember, he says: ‘I had pretty nearly finished my smoke and was looking around and I saw what I took to be a falling star [rocket No.1]. I did not pay any attention. A few minutes after, probably five minutes, I threw my cigarette away’ (18157). So he has stayed on deck, in the cold, in his thin flannels, after throwing away his smoke, to see a second rocket which he could not have expected, having previously noticed only a falling star! Why did he stay out in that weather if his smoke was finished? He offers no explanation.
He says he then stayed a further three or four minutes on deck in sub-zero temperatures, ill-clad, even though he did not care to do so because of the cold. Why? He could not reasonably have been expecting anything to happen. Remember Second Officer Lightoller aboard Titanic had been worried that the plunging temperatures would freeze that vessel’s fresh water supply. It was indeed extremely cold.
Gill’s story is odd. He does not seek out the company of others on deck (who presumably have a degree of shelter from the cold
) when he is having his everlasting smoke on an open deck. He does not talk to anyone or see anyone who might verify his presence. No Californian witness on watch that night sees Gill, who had ‘turned in’, but goes from his bedclothes to a thin flannel suit for virtually one-third of an hour on deck. No-one sees the red glow of the cigarette.
Gill is so interested in a falling star that he waits to see more, but is not interested enough when he sees ‘distress rockets’ to tell any officer or lookout, nor even to wake any pals below. He did not even seek out any crew member on duty to tell them this astonishing news, not even the one he alleges he had previously roused and chatted with about the minor matter of ‘a big German’ ship passing. By the time of the British Inquiry, Gill’s US evidence – that he immediately realised these rockets meant a vessel in distress – had noticeably changed. He said: ‘Whether it was a distress signal or a signal rocket I could not say, but it was a rocket’. But counsel for the Leyland Line would not let him get away with such a fudging of his own responsibilities:
18193. Did it occur to you that what you saw was something which you ought to report to the officer who was in charge of your ship? — No, I had no business to report it…
18195. You did not attach much importance at the time apparently to what you say you had seen? — No, not any importance [a direct contradiction of his US evidence; having immediately meant ‘a vessel in distress’, his sighting now had ‘no importance’]. It was a signal, and other people on the ship, the proper people, would attend to that. It was nothing to do with me.
18196. And it was not ‘til after you had heard of the loss of the Titanic that it occurred to you that this signal that you had seen might have been of some importance? — Yes. [His US evidence: ‘I saw distinctly a second rocket in the same place, and I said to myself, ‘That must be a vessel in distress’]
The same counsel extracted this wriggle:
18212. Have you ever stated that the vessel you saw was heading in the same direction as the Californian? — Yes, I have made that remark. [Heading meaning the direction in which the ship’s bows are pointing – Californian was stopped]
18213. Is that right or wrong? Do you want to correct it? — Well, I am not sure whether she was going in that direction or not. On second thoughts I cannot be sure.
18214. On second thoughts you appreciate now that if that other vessel was heading in the same direction as you were, she was heading towards Europe? — Well, I do not know.
If he saw it, it should be easy for Gill to say what direction the ‘very large steamer’ was going in. Gill’s evidence particularly fell apart in London, although this was not in the interests of the British Inquiry, which had proclaimed the absolute trustworthiness of this witness before he had even opened his mouth (see the Attorney General’s quote, later in this narrative). Gill’s problem was that he had said in his American affidavit that he had seen a passenger ship proceeding quickly in the first place, and it had not been there when he noticed rockets. For it not to be there, the ship has to go away – except that every other witness on every ship testified that the ice barrier extended vastly to the south of the Californian, blocking the route west to the Titanic and other shipping. The magical solution for Gill, to allow his passenger ship to leave the scene, was for the icefield itself to disappear! It extended to the south, to be sure, but by his account only for a few miles, then dissolving to allow the big passenger liner he saw steam at full speed through open water – departing conveniently in order that he could later see rockets, but no ship.
This artful device also absolved Gill of any conceivable responsibility for seeing a vessel rushing headlong at a blockade that would spell her doom, while himself doing nothing about her obvious danger. In his American affidavit, Gill mentions a conversation with his bunkmate which the bunkmate denies. Gill says he was asked by Thomas ‘Are we in the ice?’, replying ‘Yes, but it must be clear off to the starboard, for I saw a big vessel going along full speed’. Thomas said later he did not believe Gill saw any ship, and that he had only mentioned their being in the ice. Not that the sea was clear and ice-free elsewhere. The ice simply was not clear to the south, as we know from the Mount Temple, the Carpathia, the Birma, Frankfurt, Virginian, and Californian herself, in their accounts of the icefield that night and next morning.
At question 18138 in the British Inquiry, Gill repeats that there was ‘nothing to stop her’:
I did not expect a ship to be lit up like she was and stationary, and nothing to stop her, because I could see the edge of the ice floe, the edge of the field of ice; it appeared to be 4 or 5 miles away.
So the limit of the field is 4 or 5 miles away. And Gill had meanwhile said in reply to the previous question that the ship he saw was ‘a good distance off, I should say not more than 10 miles, and probably less’. A simple way around the problem; the ice only goes 5 miles, but the moving steamer is close to 10 miles away, allowing her to pass unobstructed. And he will spell out this deus ex machina again:
18148. So that the ice that you were in extended for about five miles on your starboard side [to the south]? — About that.
This clearly allows a few miles clear water for the vessel he saw to surge onward and far away, out of sight. As he will happily confirm: ‘I did not think the ship would be standing still with nothing to stop her’ (18211). Donkeyman Gill then, by his own words, could see where the icefield ended – yet Captain Lord and his officers could not. Those idiots on his ship could not see their way (even with binoculars) around an obvious corner – obvious to a donkeyman from below deck – and these holders of various Board of Trade certificates of competency, up to and including Captain Lord’s Extra Master’s certificate, had to wait until morning! The amazing shrinking icefield may, in Gill’s mind, protect his evidence on all sides. In reality, however, it sounds its death knell.
One option is that Gill is right in his claim that the steamer rushed away unimpeded and disappeared. If so, it cannot be the Titanic! Do not forget that Gill says he saw his vessel rushing away fully forty minutes before he claims to see his rockets (according to his US affidavit). Where then is the eminently-desired corroboration of the theory that Gill’s vessel, being supposedly the Titanic, was the Californian’s near ship and vice versa?
The other alternative, of course, is that Gill is wrong – the icefield was there, and it proved impenetrable, as it was to all shipping that night. In which case he ought to be able to see that stopped vessel when he later sees rockets. But now he cannot see a ship!
This is what he says in London about when he went up on deck for a smoke, prior to seeing rockets:
18155 Did you see the steamer then? — No, I could not see anything of the steamer at all. She had disappeared. She had either steamed away, or I do not know what she had done. She was not there.
18156. [The Commissioner] What time was this? — After one bell.
[Mr Rowlatt] Between half-past 12 and 1.
[The Commissioner] I do not understand that.
Lord Mersey is right not to understand it, because the Titanic has not sunk by this time. If Gill’s ship is the Titanic, a liner undoubtedly stopped by ice – whether iceberg or icefield – then she must still be visible at this time. She is just beginning to lower lifeboats. Let us not put a tooth in it: Gill did not see any ship at all. The widely-testified extent of the ice barrier proves him a liar. He has invented the story of a big passenger liner to add to his own newsworthiness, to thrill readers who will help fund his sensational story of the garishly-lit leviathan impelled to her doom. Merely seeing rockets is not worth $500 – for that kind of money, the Lady herself must make an appearance.
Gill, in evidence, does not appear to have the heart to conclusively put the big ship and the rocket-source together as one and the same. His bunkmate would say that he cannot join the two because Gill did not see a big ship at all. Gill says the rockets he saw came ‘from the water’s edge – what appeared to be the water’s edge – a great distance aw
ay’ (18157), which is a description that has no ship blocking the view all the way to the horizon. But it is also unquestionably a different distance to that at which he saw the steamer, which was at a ‘good’ distance, not a ‘great’ distance:
18137 How far off do you judge she [the previously visible steamer] was? — She was a good distance off, I should say not more than 10 miles, and probably less.
This is also a change from his US position, when both his big steamer and his rockets were each about 10 miles away.
Elsewhere in his evidence Gill expresses doubts that his ship was a British vessel, as he knew the Titanic was: ‘She was a big ship, I could see that at a glance, in fact, I did not think she was a British ship, I thought probably she would be a German boat’ (18208). This is hardly important, but the real significance is that Gill’s big ship is irrelevant from any viewpoint from which his evidence is assessed.
If he indeed saw the Titanic’s rockets, then they were from ‘a great distance’ and after this other vessel had gone away. The substance of his evidence is then simply to place the Californian at a great distance from the Titanic, over the ‘water’s edge’ (horizon) and invisible to that vessel just as she was invisible to Gill – in which case the Californian is not the Titanic’s mystery ship, which came not just within sight, but to a distance of only about 5 miles. And if Gill sees rockets ‘a great distance away’, he is only echoing Stone who thinks at times that the rockets are coming not from the ship he can indeed see in the foreground, but ‘possibly from a greater distance past the ship’ (7908). There is an obvious similarity here.
The only other alternative left open is that the big steamer Gill had seen was the Titanic. This would mean that she was, at the time he saw her (close to midnight) more than 5 miles away from the Californian but less than 10 miles away. Why then is this vessel moving when the Titanic, by commonest reckoning, has long been stopped? And more importantly perhaps, why does she disappear so suddenly when the Titanic did not? Why also are the rockets seen in a place that must be far in the wake of (behind) this ‘full speed’ moving vessel that Gill first saw no less than forty minutes earlier? How can the Titanic fire rockets to her rear?