Miss Kreuchen


R

Rolf Vonk

Guest
Hello dear people,

I was looking at the cabin list when there raised a question. On the list Miss Emilie Kreuchen is placed in the same cabin as Mrs Edward Scott Robert. Though the "cave list" indicated this, it isn't correct. Mrs Robert's niece Elisabeth Walton Allen mentioned the following:

'My aunt's maid came to my door and asked if she could speak to me. I went into the corridor and she said, "Miss Allen, the baggage room is full of water." I replied that she needn't worry because the watertight compartments would be shut and it would be all right for her to go back to her cabin. She went back and returned to us immediately to say her cabin, which was forward on Deck E, was flooded.'

This is the evidence that Miss Kreuchen was on the forward part of E deck. I suggest she was in E11. Maybe even a cabin with a porthole, but probably not a cabin before E8. Mr Chambers and his wife were in E8 and he stated in his testimony:

'Our stateroom was E-8, on the starboard side; that is the lowest berth deck, and as far as I know, we were as far forward as any of the first-cabin passengers on that deck'

Any ideas or thoughts about this? I'm looking forward to your responses!

Regards,
Rolf
 

Ben Holme

Member
Feb 11, 2001
714
6
183
Hey Rolf,

You are correct in that Miss Kreunchen occupied an E-deck cabin rather than B-3. In any case, I think I'm right in saying that B-3 was a single birth cabin. This also rules out C-46 for the Cavendishes and their maid - too small.

I agree that she must have occupied a forward E-deck cabin. E-11 is a good suggestion. She may even have been the "single woman" descibed by James McGough who occupied the cabin opposite i.e. E-23. McGough alerted her to the danger after the collision. On the other hand, E-23 may be too far aft.

Hope this helps

Best wishes
Ben
 
D

Daniel Rosenshine

Guest
I wouldn't quite rule out a cabin more forward than E8. Chambers stated that only as far as he knew. It may be possible that there were no other occupied cabins in the passage where E8 was, but what about the other more forward cabins in the other more forward passage? He might not have seen Kreuchen walk that way. Also being a maid (and on Titanic) she wouldn't have spent much time walking around on E deck.

On the other hand, Kreunchen was walking up and down decks, to and from her cabin so Chambers *might* have seen her had she walked far forward.

Chambers makes no mention of seeing the 1st. class E deck corridor flooded so it is likely that he and his wife left before. When Kreunchen returned from her trip to B deck, she said her cabin was flooded, thus again she might have been making the trips when Chambers might not have seen her.

I'm not saying she was in a cabin more forward than E8, all I'm saying is that you can't rule them out as even Chambers wasn't sure, it was only as far as he knew.

Daniel.
 

Ben Holme

Member
Feb 11, 2001
714
6
183
Hello Daniel,

A point well made. I hadn't fully considered the layout of the E-deck cabins. Of course, the cabins were located in mini-corridors that lead into the main passage i.e "Park Lane".
I can't imagine Chambers was so observant as to notice one woman tucked away in a forward cabin.

Would you agree that this would tend to rule out an inside cabin for Miss Kreunchen?

Regards
Ben
 
R

Rolf Vonk

Guest
Hi there guys,

Of course it could have been possible that Mr Chambers didn't noticed Miss Kreuchen or other passengers in a more forward cabin than theirs.

But realise that there were only 2 other mini-corridors on the forward part of E deck beside the corridor of E8. One of them was the corridor with a staircase to D deck and F deck (the squashcourt)with four cabins. It's unlikely that Miss Kreuchen had a cabin in this corridor. I think it would be rather strange to put a lonely maid into a cabin with a capacity of 4 passengers. So I think that corridor can be deleted from the list. The other corridor was with cabins E1-E4. Miss Kreuchen could have been in one of these. But than it seems to me that she always took the forward staircase to D deck, when she was going up the decks. Otherwise I don't believe that Mr Chambers didn't noticed her. I think it isn't strange at all to look if the rooms in your corridor or the ones more forward were occupied or not. Beside who would put a lonely German woman away in a cabin in an empty corridor more forward than all the other passengers? I can't imagine that was White Star's strategy.

I really don't believe that Mr and Mrs Chambers won't have seen Miss Kreuchen when she was in a more forward cabin than them. The rooms were occupied during a period of 5 days. In these days people go to the diningsaloon 3 times a day, go to the toilets in the gangways, go to the decks etc. It's very likely that passengers met eachother in the corridors.

E11 seems a good guess for Miss Kreuchen. A good one person cabin in the nearness of other people and not too far away from the main staircase.

Any thoughts or things to add? I'd like to hear them!

Warm regards,
Rolf
 

Ben Holme

Member
Feb 11, 2001
714
6
183
Hi Rolf,

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I personally consider it more likely that she occupied a cabin aft of E-8. As I said, she may even have been the woman observed by McGough.

However, if in fact she did occupy one of the cabins in the first mini-passage i.e E1-E4, it occured to me that she would have had a very short distance to walk to the D-deck staircase. Therefore, she may not have been noticed as she went back and forth across "Park Lane".

Also, if you look at the E-deck plan, you will notice that this first passage is located further forward than the D-deck stairway. Therefore, Chambers would have had no reason to pass this corridor, unless he was making a particulalry thorough exploration of the deck. I doubt Chambers would have ventured further forward than the staircase.

Hope this helps

Regards
Ben
 
R

Rolf Vonk

Guest
Hey Ben,

Yes, I see your point. I do also not believe that Mr Chambers would have seen Miss Kreuchen when she used the little staircase to D deck. However, as I already mentioned, it seems strange to put a lonely woman into a cabin with the capacity of 4 passengers (what all the four cabins in the little corridor had). I would choose the inside 1 berth cabin for my maid and not a strange 4 person berthroom.

I don't know, but it's just a tiny little distance from mini-corridor E8 into the long parklane avenue and just around the corner to mini-corridor E1 etc. I doubt if passengers never saw a person walking in that part of the parklane to his/her cabin.

I understand about the lonely woman McCough saw, but I think that E23 is too far aft or in the middle of the first class corridor. However, it could be possible that Miss Kreuchen went to her cabin, saw the water flooding over the floor of the entrance to the grandstaircase on E deck and went back. But Miss Allen said the maid saw the water in her cabin, so I guess Miss Kreuchen has been into the corridor via the grand staircase and went forward. In that case she didn't used the little staircase on D deck.

Though I'm going to doubt about E1. That's also a possible room...

What do you think about this?

Sincerely,
Rolf
 

Ben Holme

Member
Feb 11, 2001
714
6
183
Hi Rolf,

I agree, it does seem unlikely that Miss Kreunchen was placed in a cabin with a capacity of 4. However, Laura Francatelli, the Duff-Gordon maid occupied one such cabin. I realise that Miss F was a little more "upmarket" than a maid, but their situations are comparable in that the Duff-Gordons paid for her cabin...I think!

I see your point about the unlikelihood of Miss K passing unoticed, but as Daniel pointed out, she probably spent very little time on E-deck in her own cabin.

The detail of her cabin being descibed as "flooded" suggests to me that the cabin was indeed far forward. Also, there was a slight list to starboard at this point and although a mere list wouldn't prevent the flow of water at a later stage, it may have diverted the flow away from the cabins on the port side of park lane i.e the inside ones when she made her observation.

Regards
Ben
 
Jul 20, 2000
1,479
5
313
Hi Ben, Rolf,

My understanding is that Miss Francatelli was in E-36; which she seems to shared with Miss Wilson. E-36 was a 3-berth room. The only two 4-berth room that I know of in 1st Class were E-201 and E-203.

The only rooms on the port-side of Park Lane in the forward section of the ship were for 3rd Class Passengers and for Crew. All of the 1st Class rooms were on the starboard-side of the ship. Park Lane or Scotland Road was the wide fore-aft passageway on the port-side of the ship. The name should not be applied to the Passenger's fore-aft passageway on the starboard-side.

Rolf, I'm puzzled by your: In that case she didn't used the little staircase on D deck comment. Surely if her room was already under water then the stairway that went from E-deck upto D-deck would also have been under water?

In case timing is of interest I have seem a number of postings about E-deck flooding and they conclude that the water had reached the Grand Staircase by 12.30 and that that by 12.40; E-8 would have been submerged.

Hope this helps,
Lester
 
Jul 20, 2000
1,479
5
313
My apologizes Rolf,

I misread your little staircase on D deck comment. On re-reading it you are saying she did not use it. We agree she could not have as it would have been underwater.

Lester
 
D

Daniel Rosenshine

Guest
I was trying to post this yesterday, but ET wasn't responding for some reason, so here goes again:

=======================================================
I'd like to also point out that Chambers and his wife did not sit around their cabin, thus it is an even smaller possibility that he could see the maid.

He and his wife would have undoubtedly been probing the ship themselves.

I'm not sure of the relationship of Kreunchen to her employer, whether she was more of a friend then a “tie up my corset” maid. If she was the latter, than no doubt, whilst all dressed for dinner she would have been up in B3 helping Mrs. Robert ... thus again Chambers would not have seen her.

Woolner was in C52, with passengers on either side of him (and no doubt in other nearby cabins). When asked about this, he did not know anyone or whether others were in cabins close to him. Isham was in a cabin NEXT DOOR to Gracie, yet he had never seen her throughout the voyage.

I doubt that Chambers was so curious as to know who was in all the cabins around him, and if he was I doubt that Kreuchen was walking around her cabin for him to notice her (that is supposing she was in a cabin more forward than his).

It is not unusual for her to be in an outside cabin. They were not 4 berth, but 2 berth with an upper Pullman berth (which no doubt would have been tucked away). Regardless of her status (or others) there were plenty such occupants. Meoni (or what ever the agreed spelling for her is) would have no doubt been in C37 all by herself. The Countess with her cousin moved to C77 (from C37) and I doubt that they would have moved the maid to another 3 berth cabin opposite them, as she already was in a (nicer) 3 berth cabin.

Back to Kreunchen being by herself in a larger cabin. I feel that Robert was HIGHLY ripped off for the price she paid and the cabins she was placed in! The least they could do was offer the maid a nearby cabin, no she was down on E deck, hopefully in an outside cabin. Robert paid enough for the party to be in B deck suites! Yet Robert occupied the smallest size cabin offered in first class (there were other such size cabins, but she was in one of them).

I guess we'll be stuck on Kreuchen and where she was unless further evidence crops up to allow us to pin point her cabin more thoroughly.

Regards,

Daniel.
 

Ben Holme

Member
Feb 11, 2001
714
6
183
Hi Lester, Daniel,

Daniel - to further your point, bedroom steward Andrew Cunningham apparently neglected to notice some of the passengers in the locality of his "section" i.e Frederick Hoyt and his wife in C-93 and the Futrelles in C-123 (possibly).

Lester - I always thought "Park Lane" referred to the starboard fore to aft corridor for 1st class passengers on the starboard side. "Scotland Road" on the port side was for 3rd class and crew. Park lane seems more of an appropriate name for the starboard passage. I'd be surprised if both names referred to the port corridor, but I guess it could be true.

Regards
Ben
 
R

Rolf Vonk

Guest
Hi there,

First of all I would see the parklane rather as the first class corridor, but I didn't know it was a real excisting name. I thought it was more like a kind of joke.

However, I think it's almost certain that we can't place Miss Kreuchen in a specific cabin. We can only place her on the forward E deck and that's it. However I really think she is in one of the two forward mini-corridors and certainly not that little inside corridor with it four 4-person cabins. But I have to tell you that I don't trust that cabin list anymore at all. We are speculating about unknown cabins, but there must have been known cabins, who were also wrong. I have that idea with the Cavendish party and Mr Ross.

But Daniel, as you think that the Chambers weren't the whole time in their cabin and when you see Miss Kreuchen as the silent maid, it could even be possible that Kreuchen and the Chambers were in the same mini-corridor. Their is no evidence for, nor evidence against this in my opinion.

Regards,
Rolf
 
Jul 20, 2000
1,479
5
313
Re Park Lane; Scotland Road. In ANTR Walter Lord says ".... the working alleyway on E deck ..... - the officers called it 'Park Lane', the crew 'Scotland Road'.

Hope this helps,
Lester
 
R

Rolf Vonk

Guest
Hi Lester,

Thanks for the information. I haven't read Walter Lord's ANTR, however I have the movie. Though I can't remember that the name "Park lane" was mentioned in it.

Regards,
Rolf
 
D

Daniel Rosenshine

Guest
I always thought that "Park Lane" an upper class street in London was kind of a joke name for the E deck first class corridor. Lester makes a good point, but perhaps Walter Lord was wrong ... or confused.

Ben; personally I do not think that the Futrelles were in C123. One other party that Cunningham would have forgotten to mention is the Harrises, in C83 (funny that, both cabins end with a '3', 83, 93).

I guess even the cabins around E8 might be a possibility for Kreunchen. Then on the other hand perhaps Chambers wasn't that oblivious, to make a statement that as far as he knew, no one occupied a more forward cabin than his.

Daniel.
 
Dec 13, 1999
296
0
261
Daniel: I would be interested in knowing why you think Mr. and Mrs. Futrelle did not occupy C123. I still think it's a very safe guess. Mrs. Harris did recall her friend as being accomodated across the corridor, and C121 is a little bit too far, I believe. C123 is the only one who would fit Mrs. Harris' allegations. We actually talk together quite often via email and it's the first time I hear your theory. :)
 
D

Daniel Rosenshine

Guest
When you think about it, C123 was NOT across any corridor at all. There was a totally open space, of the aft grand staircase foyer between cabins C83 and C123.

If I were in C83 and was referring to C123, I would not say it was across any corridor.

Mrs. Harris did say that she had to cross the corridor. This did not imply a short distance (nor a long one), but C121, 119, 117 were all what I would consider as being across a corridor, requiring the corridor to be crossed ... so to speak.

Daniel.
 

Ben Holme

Member
Feb 11, 2001
714
6
183
re Park Lane: My source comes from "1912 Facts About Titanic" by Lee W. Meredith:

"A narrower corridor connecting all of the first class cabins on the starboard side was called "Park Lane" after a more fashionable street in London."

I'm not sure the book as a whole should be cited as authority, but for the moment I am inclined to agree with Meredith on this point.

Daniel - Do you mean to say the "corridor" which Mrs. Harris mentioned actually referred to the aft grand staircase foyer and that the Futrelles occupied a larger, outside cabin on the port side? - I'll admit seems more likely.

Regards
Ben
 
D

Daniel Rosenshine

Guest
Ben, no, not at all. I was saying that I do not count the "corridor" as being the grand staircase foyer. I don't think that anyone would call the gr. st. foyer as a corridor. People are more likely to refer to it as a foyer.

What I mean by the corridor and cabins and such is that the Futrelles were in a cabin in the more fore section of C deck, starboard side, a cabin such as C121, 119, 117. I HIGHLY doubt that the Futrelles were in a larger suite. They did not pay enough and Mrs. Harris doesn't say they were in a suite.

Daniel.
 

Similar threads

Similar threads