I remember vaguely that somebody thought one of the boats was not new but this was denied in Mersey's court. All the evidence is that the boats were new. They were built specially for Titanic and their construction was closely supervised by the Board of Trade inspector, William Chantler, as some yards were building badly designed boats.
There are endless tales in the 1912 press and many are inventions. They find their way into a book and then get copied by others.
>>I have read many books that a lifeboat that was on the Titanic was taken from another ship as it was an old lifeboat was it lifeboat number 3 ?<<
Assuming that this actually happened, is there a primary source to support that? David makes a good point about tales being spun and perpetuated, so I'd be careful about it. Personally, I don't see that it really makes any difference. Lifeboat 3 worked as advertised when it was most needed and that's really all that matters as far as the survivors are concerned.
So, just the one book, not many as you originally claimed?
The author, Robin Gardiner, does not have a very good reputation for historical accuracy around here. He's the guy (or one of the guys) who floated the phoney-baloney story about the Olympic/Titanic switch.
The quote Peter is refering to (from Gracie) is:
"Number 3 and Number 5 were both marked on our boat. Our seaman told me that it was an old one taken from some other ship, (2) and he didn't seem sure at the time which was the correct number, which apparently was 3."
The footnote (2) is "'All boats were new and none transfered from another ship,' President Ismay's testimony."
Sounds like a lot of hearsay to me, not much in the way of proof. And why would White Star put one old lifeboat amongst a bunch of new ones, on a brand new ship?
>>Bill the book is called the ship that did not sank?<<
Jonathan; Perhaps that book should be retitled "The Bogus Ship Switch Conspiracy Theory Which The Authors know Is Bogus, And Said As much In The Book But We'll Push It Anyway Because It Makes Us A Lotta Money."
We're well aware of this...er...ummm...work. It's been discussed entirely too often. If you want to go for unsupported pop culture fun-to-believe-in conspiracy theories, then you'll get along famously with this tome. If you want to learn the history as it actually is, then hang around with us. Not only are there members here who will point you to reliable sources, they'll point you to the primary sources themselves.