The evidence is very doubtful as to No. 4 being damaged. The pumps were being worked in No. 5 soon after the collision. The 10-inch leather special suction pipe which was carried from aft is more likely to have been carried for use in No. 5 than No. 4 because the doors were ordered to be opened probably soon after the collision when water was known to be coming into No. 5. There is no evidence that the pumps were being worked in No 4. The only evidence possibly favorable to the view that the pipe was required for No 4, and not for No. 5, is that Scott, a greaser, says that he saw engineers dragging the suction pipe along one hour after the collision. But even as late as this it may have been wanted for No. 5 only. The importance of the question of the damage to No. 5 is small because the ship as actually constructed was doomed as soon as the water in No. 6 boiler room and all compartments forward of it entered in the quantities it actually did. It is only of importance in dealing with the question of what would have happened to the ship had she been more completely subdivided. It was stated in evidence that if No. 4 had not been damaged or had only been damaged to an extent within the powers of the pumps to keep under, then, if the bulkheads had been carried to C deck, the ship might have been saved. Further methods of increased subdivision and their effect upon the fate of the ship are discussed later. Evidence was given showing that after the water-tight doors in the engine and boiler rooms had been all closed, except those forward of No. 4 group of boilers, they were opened again, and there is no evidence to show that they were again closed. Though it is probable that the engineers who remained below would have closed these doors as the water rose in the compartments, yet it was not necessary for them to do this, as each door had an automatic closing arrangement which would have come into operation immediately a small amount of water came through the door. It is probable, however, that the life of the ship would have been lengthened somewhat if these doors had been left open, for the water would have flowed through them to the after part of the ship, and the rate of flow of the water into the ship would have been for a time reduced as the bow might have been kept up a little by the water which flowed aft. It is thus seen that the efficiency of the automatic arrangements for the closing of the water-tight doors, which was questioned during the inquiry, had no important bearing on the question of hastening the sinking of the ship, except that, in the case of the doors not having been closed by the engineers, it might have retarded the sinking of the ship if they had not acted. The engineers would not have prevented the doors from closing unless they had been convinced that the ship was doomed. There is no evidence that they did prevent the doors from closing.