Stanley Lord Poll


Status
Not open for further replies.
May 3, 2005
2,508
222
258
Hello Bob. Thanks for the clarifiction.
However, I am of the opinion that the question illustrated the limited knowledge of the questioner in that there was legal remedy for Captain Lord at the time. The problem as I see it was that those who judged had found the ideal subject upon which they could pile inuendo after inuendo and thus detract the attention of the public and the press from many real "truths" concerning what happened and the events leading up to it.

The real judges of Captain Lord were his peers... those who, in their daily working lives, could find themselves in a lifboat or in the water at a moment's notice nd withour warning
Sailors believed that that the principal signs of bad luck were.
You can bet your sea boots that if his peers had thought Lord was as he was being portrayed by the Inquiries and public in general, then not a single man would have signed-on with him and he, himself would have found himself on the beach. He most likely would have been added to the lists of "Johnas". None of the above transpired. In fact, in all the long years I spent at sea, I never hear the name of the man or his ship, mentioned. Mention of the name "Titanic" was an invitation to trouble
In truth, not until 2008, when I joined this illustious band of brothers, did I ever hear the name 'Captain Lord'.
In truth, except for seeing that 1953 "Titanic"movie , I had never seen or heard of the Titanic, until I "discovered" this website in 2005. Much less Stanley Lord or Walter Lord.
 
Last edited:
May 3, 2005
2,508
222
258
The poll doesn’t ask the readers to decide the guilt or innocence of Captain Lord. It asks if the investigation should be reopened TO CLEAR THE NAME OF CAPTAIN STANLEY LORD! What kind of investigation is opened with the stated purpose of arriving at a pre-determined result? What a poor question! Here is the question in case anyone thinks I am misstating it.
Do You Think the British Board of Trade and the United States Senate should be petitioned to re-open the 1912 CALIFORNIAN inquiry to clear the name of Captain Stanley Lord?

Yes___________________ No_________________
This is off topic and in reference to a fictional person, fictional.persons, and a fictional ship and a fictional story.
...But.....
How about opening an investigation "To clear the name of Lieutenant Steven Maryk of USS Caine of all charges brought against him of causing a mutiny and to commend him for the bravery of his actions." :)
 
May 3, 2005
2,508
222
258
I think his name should be clared, he was not to blame in any way, about what happend that night, his radio man had told the titanic about the ice but was told to shurt up old man and keep out, the only thing i would say may be captain lord should of worken up his wirless man to check what the rockets wear but a lot of things happend that night that caused this, it is esayer to blame to fall guy I.E Lord than the white start line who did not have enough lifeboats on board.
Hello Linda! -
I am in agreement.
Maybe Captain Lord can be blamed for not taking further action after failing to try to get contact with the Morse Lamp to try via the wireless.

.......But......

I think even though if Captain Lord might have gotten underway and arrived at the wreck site as soon as possible it would have been unjust to accuse him of not "Saving many, if not all " of those on Titanic.

This has been covered in previous threads and has been more or less proven that some additional persons might have been saved, but Captain Lord could not be blamed for the death of all 1,500. And there would have been a lot of additional problems even if he had somehow "Saved many if not all"and somehow got all 2,200 aboard the Californian.

I think someone has said "They were looking for a scapegoat and found one.......Stanley Lord"
 
Last edited:

Bob_Read

Member
May 9, 2019
515
239
88
USA
Hello Linda! -
I am in agreement.
Maybe Captain Lord can be blamed for not taking further action after failing to try to get contact with the Morse Lamp to try via the wireless.

.......But......

I think even though if Captain Lord might have gotten underway and arrived at the wreck site as soon as possible it would have been unjust to accuse him of not "Saving many, if not all " of those on Titanic.

This has been covered in previous threads and has been more or less proven that some additional persons might have been saved, but Captain Lord could not be blamed for the death of all 1,500. And there would have been a lot of additional problems even if he had.

I think someone has said "They were looking for a scapegoat and found one.......Stanley Lord"
It’s a lot easier to defend trying to do something and not getting results than not doing anything and guaranteeing no results.
 

Mark Baber

Moderator
Member
Dec 29, 2000
6,242
241
333
1. The poll which inspired this discussion was taken in 1988 and its result is apparently unknown. Theee is therefore no useful purpose in discussing it.

2. Captain Lord has generated probably hundreds of thousands of words' worth of discussion here and there's no need for another discussion.

3. This thread is now closed. There are many existing threads, at least one of which is bound to be a better place to discuss any Californian-related issues that tickle your fancy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads