Survival of the Third Class women

[Brad Walton]

Does anyone have an opinion on the correctness / accuracy of this statement from Gleicher's _Rescue of the Third Class..._ (p. 96): "...the thing that ultimately set apart the Third Class women and children (and the Second Class men) from their counterparts in other classes, especially the First Class, was their unlucky entanglement with the those on board whom the authorities feared : the 'dangerous individuals,' [i.e.] the Third Class men." Thanks in advance.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

I have not seen that statement but IMO there was no intent of any sort of anyone's part that resulted in so many victims from the groups that you mentioned. I think it was more due to the anatomy of the ship and the order in which the lifeboats were lowered that night. The Third Class passengers might have been separated from other classes during normal voyage because of concerns about spread of disease etc but once the seriousness of the situation was realized by the Captain and other Officers, I don't believe that any active attempt was made to isolate anyone below-decks.

Third Class women - indeed all third class passengers - were berthed lower than the rest, D-deck and below. Although those in the bow section were among the first passengers to realize the danger, their route to the boat deck was very long and convoluted (this is illustrated well on the picture on p119 of Titanic: An Illustrated History). There were a LOT of Third Class passengers in comparatively small spaces and they had to negotiate a rabbit warren of narrow corridors to get to the boat deck. Furthermore, those in the bow section had friends and relatives in the stern section and vice versa, which meant that many of them were moving backwards and forwards along those narrow corridors searching for each other. All that took up time and was the main reason that most of them could not or did not get to the boat deck in time to catch a lifeboat.

As for low survival ratio for the men in Second Class, as PE-K pointed out, all Second Class passengers were berthed in the stern section of the ship. Therefore, it is possible that realization that the Titanic was going to sink might have come a bit later to them. By the time majority of the Second Class passengers started arriving on the boat deck, the crew had very likely started loading the rear group of boats on both sides. By then there were larger crowds around those rear boats and since it was women and children first on the starboard side and women and children only on the port side, most Second Class men were unable to find places on lifeboats. Also, the fact that in the later stages there were large groups of Third Class passengers, including men, boarding some lifeboats (Lifeboats #15 for example), that again handicapped the men from Second Class. Many of them might not have realized that there were not enough lifeboats for all or expected that the Titanic would in the later stages lose its longitudinal stability and sink very rapidly.

 

[Brad Walton]

Thanks, Arun, for your response.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

I decided to read the testimony at the British Inquiry of Third Class Steward John Edward Hart once again about the activities of his colleagues and himself in mustering the Third Class passengers especially women and children. He told the British Inquiry that he collected a group of about 25 women and children and made their way to Lifeboat #15, into which they all boarded. I somehow got the impression that Hart had been tutored into saying what he had to say and the examiners realized this and the line of questioning was accordingly tough.

Both Samuel Rule and George Cavell, who, like Hart were saved on board Lifeboat #15, seemed to suggest that there were far more men on board then women and children as the boat was finally lowered off the A-deck. But Hart testified to the contrary and claimed that the survivors in the lifeboat were mostly Third Class women. Following are relevant excerpts from his testimony.

9967. A band of women and children?
- Yes.

9968. How many did you gather?
- Somewhere about 25.

9969. Were those all people from the rooms you were responsible for?
- No, also from other sections.

9970. Were they all third class passengers?
- Yes.

9971. Did you guide them by the same route?
- Yes.

9972. Where did you take them to?
- I took them to the only boat that was left then, boat No. 15.

10037. Then there were four men?
- There were four men.

10038. Four men and 13 or 14 of the crew?
- Yes.

10039. Then out of the whole boatload of 70 there were about 18 men?
- Yes.

10040. (The Solicitor-General.) And it follows that if that is right there would be about 50 women and children?
- Yes.


10076. Lord Mersey has just pointed out that you told us, on the boat deck where the boat left there were some women and their husbands. How was it they did not get into the boats?
- Because the cry was for the women and children, and the boat at that time was practically full of women and children, and these women would not leave their husbands.

I wonder if Hart has been "pressurised" into testifying the way he did? Further into the British Inquiry, he was asked for an explanation for the reason why 55% of Third Class women died and Hart was unable to answer. But his earlier responses suggested that his Third Class steward colleagues and himself did their best to muster the women and children to safety; that might actually be true but the stark figures did not make WSL stand out in very good light.

 

[Brad Walton]

Gleicher, if I remember correctly, notes that there were three officially designated avenues of escape for the third class single men. One was from the forward well deck and two were through doors off Scotland road. He notes that shortly after the collision a fair number of third-class male passengers gathered in the forward well deck, but were driven back into the ship. They seem to have been directed to the third class landings in the stern, by-passing along the way the doors through which (had they been unlocked) would have afforded them official avenues to the boat deck (where they were evidently not welcome). When they arrived at the third class landings in the stern they would have massed with, and swamped, the women, children, and married third class men. In order for Hart to bring convoys of steerage women to the boat deck, he needed to extract and separate the women from the crowds of unmarried and married men, who were not permitted on the boat deck, and among whom the women were interspersed. I think that this is what Gleicher meant when he referred to the "fatal entanglement" of the steerage women with the steerage men. The same entanglements would presumably also have occurred on the after well deck and/or the ladders leading from the after well deck to B deck.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

He notes that shortly after the collision a fair number of third-class male passengers gathered in the forward well deck, but were driven back into the ship. They seem to have been directed to the third class landings in the stern, by-passing along the way the doors through which (had they been unlocked) would have afforded them official avenues to the boat deck (where they were evidently not welcome)

Driven back by whom? The door dividing the second and third class areas at the stern remained open throughout and if they had come though that and got to the stairs on B-deck, it would have led to the boat deck. It is believed that many surviving Third Class men used that route.

Of course, the biggest issue was finding their way to that door through the labyrinth of narrow passageways within the bowels of the Titanic. THAT was where the main problem lay AND what you have said yourself (see below)

When they arrived at the third class landings in the stern they would have massed with, and swamped, the women, children, and married third class men. In order for Hart to bring convoys of steerage women to the boat deck, he needed to extract and separate the women from the crowds of unmarried and married men, who were not permitted on the boat deck, and among whom the women were interspersed. I think that this is what Gleicher meant when he referred to the "fatal entanglement" of the steerage women with the steerage men.

There! Many single third class men had friends and acquaintances including women who might have been part of an informal group. The "Addergoole 13" was one example, consisting of single men and women who were likely berthed separately and might have spent time searching for each other after the accident (only 3 survived). There must have been similar "groups" among the other Irish and many Scandinavian passengers in Third Class. The Lebanese and other Middle Eastern passengers would have sought each other for support and that could also have caused delays; note that a large number of Lebanese-Syrian women were on Collapsible C that was lowered as late as 2 am. As for large families like the Sages and Goodwins, it would not have been easy to keep track of everyone and find their way up to the boat deck at the same time. Finally, all those different types of groups and people would have got in each others' way, speaking in different languages resulting in mixed messages and more confusion.

In order for Hart to bring convoys of steerage women to the boat deck, he needed to extract and separate the women from the crowds of unmarried and married men, who were not permitted on the boat deck, and among whom the women were interspersed.

As I have said above, Hart's testimony has to be taken with a very large chunk of salt. He claimed that there were as many as 50 women on board lifeboat #15 out of which nearly half were those he had rounded-up and taken to that boat, on which he was also saved. Evidence from other sources do NOT support his statements.

 

[Brad Walton]

"Driven back by whom?" The third-class stewards, apparently. "Driven" is perhaps too aggressive a word. AB John Poingdestre reported that shortly after the collision he saw between fifty and a hundred male steerage passengers, with baggage, on the forward well deck, to which they had gone to avoid the flooding of their quarters. Among them were third class stewards "giving information." (See Gleicher, p. 62). The information, or rather the instructions, that the stewards gave them was evidently to return inside the ship and to make their way to the stern. This in spite of the fact that one of the officially designated routes to the boat deck for male steerage was directly from the forward well deck. On their way to the stern, these steerage passengers would have passed a door leading to their second officially designated avenue of escape, the "saloon companionway" (ie. the forward grand staircase). However the door opening on this staircase was locked and remained locked. There was a third route officially designated to steerage as a conduit to the boat deck, via a second class staircase leading to a landing on the boat deck aft the fourth funnel. The door to this passage was normally forbidden and locked to steerage. It was through this passage, apparently, that many steerage women were guided to the boat deck.
"The door dividing the second and third class areas at the stern remained open throughout and if they had come though that and got to the stairs on B-deck, it would have led to the boat deck." Which door are you referring to?

 

[Arun Vajpey]

AB John Poingdestre reported that shortly after the collision he saw between fifty and a hundred male steerage passengers, with baggage, on the forward well deck, to which they had gone to avoid the flooding of their quarters.

Yes, I read about that. I wonder if it was because the stewards, realizing that the ship was flooding from the bow section, felt that it would have been risky and chaotic for passengers to congregate in the forward well deck area?

The information, or rather the instructions, that the stewards gave them was evidently to return inside the ship and to make their way to the stern

That is what I have some doubts about. Is there any evidence that the stewards actually instructed the Third Class passengers berthed at the bow end to head towards the stern or was that the natural instinct of many passengers themselves who realized that the Titanic was flooding from the bow end? That and what Steward Hart saw (see below) suggests that many Third Class passengers were either searching for their friends and/or relatives or were disorientated by the labyrinth of corridors and (in some cases) inability to read on converse in English.

On their way to the stern, these steerage passengers would have passed a door leading to their second officially designated avenue of escape, the "saloon companionway" (ie. the forward grand staircase). However the door opening on this staircase was locked and remained locked

I know that this door was locked during normal passage and likely remained so in the first hour after the collision. You might be right, but I might have missed the evidence that they remained locked throughout.

There was a third route officially designated to steerage as a conduit to the boat deck, via a second class staircase leading to a landing on the boat deck aft the fourth funnel. The door to this passage was normally forbidden and locked to steerage.

Which door are you referring to?

I believe I am referring to two doors actually. Steward John Hart saw that the door connecting the E-deck passageway to one of the Second Class staircases stood open early after the collision and yet most Third Class passengers were walking right past it. Had they gone though that door and up the staircase, it would have led to the boat deck but they might not have known that at the time or reluctant to enter a Second Class area.

Having said that I do have doubts about Hart's reliability as a witness. His statements about rounding up 25 women and children and leading them all to Lifeboat #15 on which he survived himself do not match other accounts. That does not mean that his statement about that open door on E-deck was also untrue but it does make one wonder whether Hart was trying to make it appear as though Third Class passengers, especially the women and children, had an easier passage to the boat deck than is often presumed. Having survived himself, Hart's testimony might have been a combination of survivor's guilt and corporate tutoring.

The other door I am referring to is the one depicted in the large photograph (from the Olympic) on p97 of Don Lynch's Titanic: An Illustrated History. That door was on B-deck and the corridor that can be seen just beyond was accessible to steerage passengers and remained open throughout; the staircase in the foreground also led to the boat deck. That was part of the "third route" that you are referring to above. But what I am not certain is the route between the E-deck door that Hart mentioned and the one shown on B-deck.

If you have not already done so, I suggest reading Appendix Q on pp364-5 (of the paperback edition) of On A Sea Of Glass. They feel that the "locked gates" as reported by the likes of Daniel Buckley and Olaus Abelseth were in the open areas between the aft well deck and the Second Class Promenade area and not deep down in the bowels of the ship as suggested by some. Fitch, Layton & Wormstedt feel that there was no evidence that there was any active attempt to keep the Third Class passengers locked below but a combination of lack of knowledge of the complicated route to the boat deck, language barrier and searching for their loved ones resulted in many of them remaining below for too long.

 

[Brad Walton]

Thanks again, Arun, for your long and thoughful response. Apologies for taking so long to get back to you.

"....The information, or rather the instructions, that the stewards gave them was evidently to return inside the ship and to make their way to the stern...."
"That is what I have some doubts about. Is there any evidence that the stewards actually instructed the Third Class passengers berthed at the bow end to head towards the stern or was that the natural instinct of many passengers themselves who realized that the Titanic was flooding from the bow end?"

Well, the stewards certainly did _not_ send the 100 or so steerage passengers on the forward well deck directly up to the boat deck, although that was one of their designated escape routes. They all filed below. At some point, I am not sure whether it was before or after the return of the steerage men below deck, but it was early on, Daniel Buckley joined a small group of young men attempting to reach the boat deck via the ladders leading up from the forward well deck (again, it was an officially designated route). There was a scuffle with one of the crew who repelled the young men and locked the gate / barrier to prevent a second attempt. However the leader of the group smashed the gate and the young men got through (Lord, "Night Lives On" p. 114).

" I know that this [the door to the 'saloon companionway'] was locked during normal passage and likely remained so in the first hour after the collision. You might be right, but I might have missed the evidence that they remained locked throughout." I have not seen any evidence that this door (again, the second officially designated route of steerage escape) was ever opened. I have never read any reports of even a handful of steerage men coming up the grand staircase to the forward boat deck (except in the final minutes of the Titanic's life -- see Archibald Gracie's testimony -- and these people had clearly made it there from the stern). Also, if either of these totally unfamiliar routes off Scotland Rd were open and available to the steerage men, they would almost certainly have required the guidance of the stewards to find and use them. Otherwise, why would they not find and use them? I am not aware of any evidence that the stewards offered such guidance. The evidence seems to be that the stewards guided them past these escape routes (see below) to the public areas in the stern.

The trimmer George Cavell testified to seeing the steerage men filing down Scotland Road. Both he and others reported seeing stewards posted along the route, reassuring the steerage men, telling them "to keep calm." If the stewards gave them any directions, they did not apparently include any to the boat deck, because that is not where they went.

Fireman Charles Hendrickson was caught in a crowd of steerage men on Scotland Road "working their way aft," apparently under the supervision of the stewards. They were almost all carrying their luggage. Apparently none of the stewards suggested to them that their luggage would better be abandoned (as Steward Wareham advised Edith Russell: "Kiss your trunks good-bye").

Hart's testimony agrees with that of Cavell and Hendrickson, that the steerage men were directed aft by the stewards, and not up to the boat deck. Under examination Hart explained that the steerage men went aft (rather than up to the boat deck) because no one told them to do otherwise. But surely this would have been the job of the third class stewards posted along Scotland Rd., unless they had received alternative instructions. In fact, Hart's instructions, according to his testimony, were originally not to conduct steerage passengers (of either sex) up to the boat deck, but to "wait with his people" in the after steerage section pending further instructions from the head Third-Class steward (Kiernan).
Even more disturbing, there is evidence that, in accordance with instructions, a not insignificant number or steerage passengers were actually parked in the third class dining saloon on F deck.

There is evidence of steerage passengers being restrained from access to the boat deck until quite late in the disaster. When Hart returned for his second batch of women and children, the men were demanding access to the boat deck, and "it was all the stewards could do to hold them back" (Lord, "Night Lives On," 113). Even women had trouble getting through the barriers: Kathy Gilnaugh and her friends were not permitted off the after well deck through second class space. Their male companions had to overcome the reluctance of the stewards with shouting and threats. Olaus Abelseth and his friends were stuck on the after well deck because access to the boat deck via second class was closed to the steerage men. Women were not allowed to pass until 1:30. The men were kept back until 2:00.

I have read Appendix Q of "On a Sea of Glass," and I generally agree with the facts as stated. However, I do not conclude from those facts that certain disadvantages were not imposed on the steerage passengers, both male and female -- but especially on the males -- and that, to put it as mildly as I think the evidence allows, they received less assistance than they needed, and that the third class stewards did not show the same zeal in saving their charges as did their counterparts in first and second class. I also do not believe that the evidence indicates, as some recent commentators have suggested, that the disproportionately large loss of life among the steerage passengers was due to their own short-comings.

Best wishes,

Brad

 

[Arun Vajpey]

Also, if either of these totally unfamiliar routes off Scotland Rd were open and available to the steerage men, they would almost certainly have required the guidance of the stewards to find and use them. Otherwise, why would they not find and use them? I am not aware of any evidence that the stewards offered such guidance.

The key word there is "unfamiliar". From the comfort of our desks, we would find it very difficult to imagine the labyrinth of corridors that the Third Class passengers had to negotiate to get topside and the difficulty associated with that. It was very easy to take wrong turns, double back or end-up in the wrong place while all the time trying to keep track of or searching for family and/or friends. I agree that the Third Class stewards could not offer much assistance but that is more likely because of things like sheer numbers of people they had to deal with, language barriers, different types of responses to instructions etc; while some might have waited for instructions, others might not have understood them or declined to follow them because they were searching for others. Crowd control under those circumstances would have been exceedingly difficult and time consuming. Add to that the probability that at least some of the Third Class stewards were themselves unfamiliar with the rabbit warren of corridors of the new ship, particularly those who had not been on the Olympic.

The evidence seems to be that the stewards guided them past these escape routes (see below) to the public areas in the stern.

I do not believe that the stewards did that deliberately at any stage. One possibility is that the stewards themselves were perhaps not too certain of the easiest route to the boat deck. Also, they only would have known that the Titanic was flooding from the bow end but not that she was actually slowly sinking, much less how long it had left. Therefore, it would have been natural for the stewards to direct their charges to the presumed safe haven of the stern section, which was literally high and dry. If you are part of staff that was helping a large group of scared and confused people in a flooded region, you would naturally take them to higher and drier ground and discourage getting lost while trying other less obvious escape routes on their own.

Also, remember that a lot of Third Class passengers were women and children. Many of the stewards would themselves have been from -or at least be familiar with - the backgrounds from which those people came and so would not be wantonly misleading.

There is evidence of steerage passengers being restrained from access to the boat deck until quite late in the disaster. When Hart returned for his second batch of women and children, the men were demanding access to the boat deck, and "it was all the stewards could do to hold them back" (Lord, "Night Lives On," 113). Even women had trouble getting through the barriers: Kathy Gilnaugh and her friends were not permitted off the after well deck through second class space. Their male companions had to overcome the reluctance of the stewards with shouting and threats. Olaus Abelseth and his friends were stuck on the after well deck because access to the boat deck via second class was closed to the steerage men. Women were not allowed to pass until 1:30. The men were kept back until 2:00.

As I have already mentioned, Steward Hart's statements have to be taken with a large pinch of salt. His testimony that he directed around 25 women and children to Lifeboat #15 on which he was rescued himself does not add-up at all. As for "stewards holding them back", IMO it was an attempt at crowd control and avoid a mad rush upwards that could have resulted in a stampede though the narrow passageways. I do not believe that the stewards were actively stopping any Third Class passenger from boarding lifeboats and saving their own lives nor did they have orders to do so.

We have to remember that while stuck deep down themselves while trying to manage the Third Class crowds, the stewards would have had little idea of the activity around lifeboats topside.

I do not conclude from those facts that certain disadvantages were not imposed on the steerage passengers, both male and female -- but especially on the males -- and that, to put it as mildly as I think the evidence allows, they received less assistance than they needed, and that the third class stewards did not show the same zeal in saving their charges as did their counterparts in first and second class. I also do not believe that the evidence indicates, as some recent commentators have suggested, that the disproportionately large loss of life among the steerage passengers was due to their own short-comings

The truth is somewhere in-between. Yes, there were disadvantages imposed upon all Third Class passengers but these were more due to their numbers, composition (the language barrier, large groups scattered about etc) and most importantly, position deep below and the convoluted route to get to the top rather than any active attempt to restrict them. As for third Class stewards rendering them "less assistance" or not showing enough zeal as their other class counterparts, I believe it is an unfounded and unfair statement. As I have said, many of the stewards themselves would have been from backgrounds similar to many steerage passengers and so would have been familiar with their needs. While no one is talking about any "shortcomings" of Third Class passengers, you have to look at the real picture down below. Consider the demography of the Third Class passengers - mostly from crowded, underprivileged backgrounds and many travelling in large numbers, many children, different languages etc; the stewards would have had their work cut out to achieve any sort of control. Therefore, out of necessity they would have been forced to use sterner language and methods compared with their First and Second Class counterparts to maintain some sort of order. That did not mean that the stewards did not have their hearts in their tasks; many of them also perished.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

Even women had trouble getting through the barriers: Kathy Gilnaugh and her friends were not permitted off the after well deck through second class space. Their male companions had to overcome the reluctance of the stewards with shouting and threats.

Kathy Gilnagh's survival story is based to a large extent on her interview by Walter Lord while he was working on his book in the early 1950s and so what's mentioned in ANTR is a first hand account.

Katherine Gilnagh shared an E-deck cabin with three other young women from Ireland; Katherine Mullin, Katherine Murphy and the latter's sister Margaret Murphy. All 4 women survived, but in which lifeboat(s) is uncertain; plus, their survival accounts do not entirely tally and so it is difficult to say the sort of problems one or more of them had to reach the boat deck.

Kate Gilnagh (as per ANTR) reportedly got lost on her way to the boat deck and became separated from the other three. She ended-up on the Second Class promenade deck (which in itself suggests that her route there was not barred) but the area was deserted and she was not sure how to proceed. Then she saw an unidentified man standing at the rail and staring silently into the night sea. Upon realizing Gilnagh's predicament, he hoisted her up to the next deck-up from where she found her way to the lifeboats. Gilnagh told Lord that she was then rescued on Lifeboat #16 into which she was allowed in just as it was about to be lowered. But going by Bill Wormstedt's well-researched revised timeline of lifeboat launching (which I believe), Lifeboat #16 was lowered at about 01:20 am, an hour before the Titanic finally disappeared beneath the sea.

ANTR is also the first source that mentions that fellow Third Class passenger and Irishman James Farrell yelled at a steward who was holding back a group of steerage passengers at a "barrier" (no mention of a locked grate) to let through his Longford compatriots the Murphy sisters and their companion Kate Mullin. That worked and the women were able to get through but their accounts of survival are rather different. The Murphy sisters claimed that they were on a lifeboat lashed to another and so Collapsible D is a possibility; Mullin told Senan Molony that she was on a lifeboat with about 50 people in it and it was "full of water and ice". It would be difficult to say who was responsible for that particular bit of embellishment, Mullin or Molony. (If certain opinions by Molony are any evidence, I know who I think which of the two is more likely).

I have no doubt that several groups of Third Class passengers including women were temporarily held-up by their stewards while trying to get to the lifeboats. But IMO, that is more to do with crowd control and avoiding a stampede along the narrow corridors than any attempt to keep them separated from other classes. Also, in many cases (such as with the Longford group above), a few stewards forming a human barrier would have been confused with or embellished into locked doors or gates in later statements.

 

[Brad Walton]

Kathy Gilnagh's survival story is based to a large extent on her interview by Walter Lord while he was working on his book in the early 1950s and so what's mentioned in ANTR is a first hand account.

Katherine Gilnagh shared an E-deck cabin with three other young women from Ireland; Katherine Mullin, Katherine Murphy and the latter's sister Margaret Murphy. All 4 women survived, but in which lifeboat(s) is uncertain; plus, their survival accounts do not entirely tally and so it is difficult to say the sort of problems one or more of them had to reach the boat deck.

Kate Gilnagh (as per ANTR) reportedly got lost on her way to the boat deck and became separated from the other three. She ended-up on the Second Class promenade deck (which in itself suggests that her route there was not barred) but the area was deserted and she was not sure how to proceed. Then she saw an unidentified man standing at the rail and staring silently into the night sea. Upon realizing Gilnagh's predicament, he hoisted her up to the next deck-up from where she found her way to the lifeboats. Gilnagh told Lord that she was then rescued on Lifeboat #16 into which she was allowed in just as it was about to be lowered. But going by Bill Wormstedt's well-researched revised timeline of lifeboat launching (which I believe), Lifeboat #16 was lowered at about 01:20 am, an hour before the Titanic finally disappeared beneath the sea.

ANTR is also the first source that mentions that fellow Third Class passenger and Irishman James Farrell yelled at a steward who was holding back a group of steerage passengers at a "barrier" (no mention of a locked grate) to let through his Longford compatriots the Murphy sisters and their companion Kate Mullin. That worked and the women were able to get through but their accounts of survival are rather different. The Murphy sisters claimed that they were on a lifeboat lashed to another and so Collapsible D is a possibility; Mullin told Senan Molony that she was on a lifeboat with about 50 people in it and it was "full of water and ice". It would be difficult to say who was responsible for that particular bit of embellishment, Mullin or Molony. (If certain opinions by Molony are any evidence, I know who I think which of the two is more likely).

I have no doubt that several groups of Third Class passengers including women were temporarily held-up by their stewards while trying to get to the lifeboats. But IMO, that is more to do with crowd control and avoiding a stampede along the narrow corridors than any attempt to keep them separated from other classes. Also, in many cases (such as with the Longford group above), a few stewards forming a human barrier would have been confused with or embellished into locked doors or gates in later statements.

The key word there is "unfamiliar". From the comfort of our desks, we would find it very difficult to imagine the labyrinth of corridors that the Third Class passengers had to negotiate to get topside and the difficulty associated with that. It was very easy to take wrong turns, double back or end-up in the wrong place while all the time trying to keep track of or searching for family and/or friends. I agree that the Third Class stewards could not offer much assistance but that is more likely because of things like sheer numbers of people they had to deal with, language barriers, different types of responses to instructions etc; while some might have waited for instructions, others might not have understood them or declined to follow them because they were searching for others. Crowd control under those circumstances would have been exceedingly difficult and time consuming. Add to that the probability that at least some of the Third Class stewards were themselves unfamiliar with the rabbit warren of corridors of the new ship, particularly those who had not been on the Olympic.


I do not believe that the stewards did that deliberately at any stage. One possibility is that the stewards themselves were perhaps not too certain of the easiest route to the boat deck. Also, they only would have known that the Titanic was flooding from the bow end but not that she was actually slowly sinking, much less how long it had left. Therefore, it would have been natural for the stewards to direct their charges to the presumed safe haven of the stern section, which was literally high and dry. If you are part of staff that was helping a large group of scared and confused people in a flooded region, you would naturally take them to higher and drier ground and discourage getting lost while trying other less obvious escape routes on their own.

Also, remember that a lot of Third Class passengers were women and children. Many of the stewards would themselves have been from -or at least be familiar with - the backgrounds from which those people came and so would not be wantonly misleading.


As I have already mentioned, Steward Hart's statements have to be taken with a large pinch of salt. His testimony that he directed around 25 women and children to Lifeboat #15 on which he was rescued himself does not add-up at all. As for "stewards holding them back", IMO it was an attempt at crowd control and avoid a mad rush upwards that could have resulted in a stampede though the narrow passageways. I do not believe that the stewards were actively stopping any Third Class passenger from boarding lifeboats and saving their own lives nor did they have orders to do so.

We have to remember that while stuck deep down themselves while trying to manage the Third Class crowds, the stewards would have had little idea of the activity around lifeboats topside.


The truth is somewhere in-between. Yes, there were disadvantages imposed upon all Third Class passengers but these were more due to their numbers, composition (the language barrier, large groups scattered about etc) and most importantly, position deep below and the convoluted route to get to the top rather than any active attempt to restrict them. As for third Class stewards rendering them "less assistance" or not showing enough zeal as their other class counterparts, I believe it is an unfounded and unfair statement. As I have said, many of the stewards themselves would have been from backgrounds similar to many steerage passengers and so would have been familiar with their needs. While no one is talking about any "shortcomings" of Third Class passengers, you have to look at the real picture down below. Consider the demography of the Third Class passengers - mostly from crowded, underprivileged backgrounds and many travelling in large numbers, many children, different languages etc; the stewards would have had their work cut out to achieve any sort of control. Therefore, out of necessity they would have been forced to use sterner language and methods compared with their First and Second Class counterparts to maintain some sort of order. That did not mean that the stewards did not have their hearts in their tasks; many of them also perished.

Hi Arun, thanks for your latest reply, and apologies for the delay in my reply. I have found some of your points confusing, since they often seem to support, rather than to counter, my position. Probably I have not been clear. I am not interested in _why_ the stewards (or their superiors) imposed handicaps on the third class passengers (especially the men), in reaching the boat deck (if that is indeed what they did and for whatever reasons); my main concern has been _whether_ the third class stewards (either on their own initiative or under orders), actually impeded the third class passengers (especially the men) from reaching the boat deck, whether passively (by giving less assistance than their charges required) or actively (by blocking the avenues leading to the boat deck). I think that the evidence is overwhelming that they did so, whatever their reasons. I am not making a moral evaluation.

 

[Arun Vajpey]

I am not interested in _why_ the stewards (or their superiors) imposed handicaps on the third class passengers (especially the men), in reaching the boat deck (if that is indeed what they did and for whatever reasons); my main concern has been _whether_ the third class stewards (either on their own initiative or under orders), actually impeded the third class passengers (especially the men) from reaching the boat deck, whether passively (by giving less assistance than their charges required) or actively (by blocking the avenues leading to the boat deck). I think that the evidence is overwhelming that they did so, whatever their reasons.

I believe that the Third Class stewards did impede some of their charges in the first 45 minutes or so after the collision; it is more likely IMO was from their own volition than any orders from "above". The reason, as I see it, because in that earlier timeframe, the stewards themselves were not convinced that the ship was in danger of sinking and were trying to avoid a rush of Third Class passengers onto the upper decks. We must remember that under normal sailing conditions, one of the standing orders the stewards would have had was to ensure that the steerage passengers were restricted to their spaces on board. But looking at the situation from the passengers' perspective, especially the men berthed in the lower decks of the bow section, they had seen flooding of their quarters and so had spread word among others that the ship was taking in water.

As for active "blocking" the male passengers' path to the upper decks, that might well have been part of the initial impedence but I believe that in almost all cases this was by forming a human barrier rather than any locked gates. Having said that, there were likely a couple of gates from Third Class which were normally locked during voyage but had not yet been unlocked after the collision; many Third Class passengers may well have congregated at those gates and the stewards on the other side, still themselves ignorant about the actual danger, uncertain what to do. Later, the Third Class survivors from different groups, many of whom had lost relatives and friends, would have exchanged stories and from those the myth of "Third Class passengers being barricaded out of their escape routes" would have arisen.

It is quite possible that in the earlier stages of the sinking, there was a certain amount of reluctance among the Third Class passengers themselves to force through the human barrier of stewards, which the former could easily have done by sheer weight of numbers. Discrimination and separatism by social class was accepted as a way of life by all sides concerned in that era. But later, huddled in the cold and discomfort on board the Carpathia, the scale of the disaster and the associated loss of life would have become more apparent and emotions - and with that their beliefs - would have changed dramatically.