C37 to B77


Jul 20, 2000
1,479
5
313
The links were not working when I posted and before I could edit my post E-T became unavailable.
Both links are still not working. Although under Last Day the MB opened okay first thing it is now back to being mostly in black and unreadable.

Robert, C-78 is listed as being occupied the Minahans. but was I understand only occupied by Daisy Minahan.
 

Edinlake

Member
Nov 21, 2014
31
0
56
Edinboro, Pennsylvania US
I know this thread is almost fifteen years old but I wanted to come to the defense of Jeffrey Kern who stood by his point that the Countess and Gladys Cherry did in fact most likely occupy cabin C77. Klistorner who was quite the detective on cabin allocations sums it up best. The following excerpt is taken from his exact quote in another thread.

"The Countess was once booked into C37, but the women were certainly in C77 by the time the Titanic hit an iceberg. I have not seen it, but Craig Stringer has a book (I think it's a biography) about the Countess by her grandson (I think). In it, he also places her in C77. I have never seen a decent primary source that places her in C77, but accounts and letters do suggest that she was in a cabin like C77.

One point I will mention. Cherry and Rothes could not find their lifebelts. In cabins like C37, these were kept on top of the wardrobe. Their steward found their belts under their beds. Cabin C77 was decorated in a period style, and the wardrobe-encompassing-mirror-door facility in this room was too high to place lifebelts on, and as C77 did not have a wardrobe room (another place where lifebelts were kept) they were evidently placed under the beds.

As we know, the Countess' parents crossed with her as far as Cherbourg. They may have helped her obtain better accommodation. The maid was berthed on E deck."

Based on the above statement I would have to agree that the discovery of lifebelts underneath the bed certainly points to a cabin that is NOT C37. I credit Kern for sticking to his guns on the issue when everyone was rejecting his claims. :)
 

Forb37093

Member
Jun 24, 2015
4
1
33
Dear Edinlake,

Indeed, I also believe that the Countess of Rothes and her cousin Gladys Cherry were not in stateroom C-37 if we consider, as Randy Bryan Bigham suggests it in his biography "A matter of course", the amount of luggage the two ladies carried with her aboard the ship as shows the claim for loss of property the Countess submitted to the White Star Line after the sinking.

On the other hand, if we look at the price the Countess paid for her stateroom (£86 10s) we can deduce that this price is not so far from the one the Minahans paid for their stateroom C-78 (£90) while their were apaprently three occupying the stateroom which could host only two people. If you divide the price per three you obtain an amount of £30 per person which means that the Minahan couple paid about £60 for the stateroom while Miss Daisy Minahan might have been in another stateroom. Of course the price for stateroom C-77 would have been more important than the £86 paid by the Countess but this was just to make the assumption that the price paid by the Countess considering the one paid by the Minahans could indicate that the Countess and her cousin may have stayed in a larger stateroom than C-37 knowing that the price includes the stateroom occupied by Roberta Maioni on E-deck. By the way, concerning the case of Roberta Maioni, couldn't she be the lady mentionned by a first class passenger, I don't remember exactly who, who had his stateroom on E-Deck.

All things considered, I have to say that these are just asssumptions I make, my not being a Titanic experimented researcher.

Best regards.

Damien