afford to make mistakes.
With whom the mistake lies here, is not for me to say. I see that Sir
Thomas Shaughnessy has expressed his opinion of Captain Kendall's
absolute innocence. This statement, premature as it is, does him honour,
for I don't suppose for a moment that the thought of the material issue
involved in the verdict of the Court of Inquiry influenced him in the
least. I don't suppose that he is more impressed by the writ of two
million dollars nailed (or more likely pasted) to the foremast of the
Norwegian than I am, who don't believe that the _Storstad_ is worth two
million shillings. This is merely a move of commercial law, and even the
whole majesty of the British Empire (so finely invoked by the Sheriff)
cannot squeeze more than a very moderate quantity of blood out of a
stone. Sir Thomas, in his confident pronouncement, stands loyally by a
loyal and distinguished servant of his company.
This thing has to be investigated yet, and it is not proper for me to
express my opinion, though I have one, in this place and at this time.
But I need not conceal my sympathy with the vehement protestations of
Captain Andersen. A charge of neglect and indifference in the matter of
saving lives is the cruellest blow that can be aimed at the character of
a seaman worthy of the name. On the face of the facts as known up to now
the charge does not seem to be true. If upwards of three hundred people
have been, as stated in the last reports, saved by the _Storstad_, then
that ship must have been at hand and rendering all the assistance in her
power.
As to the point which must come up for the decision of the Court of
Inquiry, it is as fine as a hair. The two ships saw each other plainly
enough before the fog closed on them. No one can question Captain
Kendall's prudence. He has been as prudent as ever he could be. There
is not a shadow of doubt as to that.
But there is this question: Accepting the position of the two ships when
they saw each other as correctly described in the very latest newspaper
reports, it seems clear that it was the _Empress of Ireland's_ duty to
keep clear of the collier, and what the Court will have to decide is
whether the stopping of the liner was, under the circumstances, the best
way of keeping her clear of the other ship, which had the right to
proceed cautiously on an unchanged course.
This, reduced to its simplest expression, is the question which the Court
will have to dec
|