There was, however, an interesting and remarkable conflict of testimony
as to whether the ship was struck by one or two torpedoes, and
witnesses, both passengers and crew, differed on this point,
conscientiously and emphatically. The witnesses were all highly
intelligent, and there is no doubt that all testified to the best of
their recollection, knowledge, or impression, and in accordance with
their honest conviction. The weight of the testimony (too voluminous to
analyze) is in favor of the "two torpedo" contention, not only because
of some convincing direct testimony, (as, for instance, Adams, Lehman,
Morton,) but also because of the unquestioned surrounding circumstances.
The deliberate character of the attack upon a vessel whose identity
could not be mistaken, made easy on a bright day, and the fact that the
vessel had no means of defending herself, would lead to the inference
that the submarine commander would make sure of her destruction.
Further, the evidence is overwhelming that there was a second explosion.
The witnesses differ as to the impression which the sound of this
explosion made upon them--a natural difference due to the fact, known by
common experience, that persons who hear the same explosion even at the
same time will not only describe the sound differently, but will not
agree as to the number of detonations. As there were no explosives on
board, it is difficult to account for the second explosion, except on
the theory that it was caused by a second torpedo. Whether the number of
torpedoes was one or two is relevant, in this case, only upon the
question of what effect, if any, open ports had in accelerating the
sinking of the ship.
While there was much testimony and some variance as to the places where
the torpedoes struck, judged by the sound or shock of the explosions,
certain physical effects, especially as to smoke and blown-up debris,
tend to locate the areas of impact with some approach of accuracy.
From all the testimony it may be reasonably concluded that one torpedo
struck on the starboard side somewhere abreast of No. 2 boiler room and
the other, on the same side, either abreast of No. 3 boiler room or
between No. 3 and No. 4. From knowledge of the torpedoes then used by
the German submarines, it is thought that they would effect a rupture of
the outer hull thirty to forty feet long and ten to fifteen feet
vertically.
[Sidenote: Flooding of boiler rooms and coal bunkers.]
Cockburn, senior Second Engineer, was of opinion that the explosion had
done a great deal of internal damage. Although the lights were out,
Cockburn could hear the water coming into the engine room. Water at once
entered No. 1 and No. 2 boiler rooms, a result necessarily attributable
to the fact that one or both of the coal bunkers were also blown open.
Thus, one torpedo flooded some or all of the coal bunkers on the
starboard side of Nos. 1 and 2 boiler rooms, and apparently flooded both
boiler rooms.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account