But all this has its moral. And that other sinking which I have related here and to the memory of which a seaman turns with relief and thankfulness has its moral too. Yes， material may fail， and men， too， may fail sometimes； but more often men， when they are given the chance， will prove themselves truer than steel， that wonderful thin steel from which the sides and the bulkheads of our modern sea-leviathans are made.
第一章CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE ADMIRABLE INQUIRY INTO THE LOSS OF THETITANIC--1912
I have been taken to task by a friend of mine on the "other side"for my strictures on Senator Smith's investigation into the loss of the Titanic， in the number of THE ENGLISH REVIEW for May， 1912. Iwill admit that the motives of the investigation may have been excellent， and probably were； my criticism bore mainly on matters of form and also on the point of efficiency. In that respect Ihave nothing to retract. The Senators of the Commission had absolutely no knowledge and no practice to guide them in the conduct of such an investigation； and this fact gave an air of unreality to their zealous exertions. I think that even in the United States there is some regret that this zeal of theirs was not tempered by a large dose of wisdom. It is fitting that people who rush with such ardour to the work of putting questions to men yet gasping from a narrow escape should have， I wouldn't say a tincture of technical information， but enough knowledge of the subject to direct the trend of their inquiry. The newspapers of two continents have noted the remarks of the President of the Senatorial Commission with comments which I will not reproduce here， having a scant respect for the "organs of public opinion，" as they fondly believe themselves to be. The absolute value of their remarks was about as great as the value of the investigation they either mocked at or extolled. To the United States Senate I did not intend to be disrespectful. I have for that body， of which one hears mostly in connection with tariffs， as much reverence as the best of Americans. To manifest more or less would be an impertinence in a stranger. I have expressed myself with less reserve on our Board of Trade. That was done under the influence of warm feelings. We were all feeling warmly on the matter at that time. But， at any rate， our Board of Trade Inquiry， conducted by an experienced President， discovered a very interesting fact on the very second day of its sitting： the fact that the water-tight doors in the bulkheads of that wonder of naval architecture could be opened down below by any irresponsible person. Thus the famous closing apparatus on the bridge， paraded as a device of greater safety， with its attachments of warning bells， coloured lights， and all these pretty-pretties， was， in the case of this ship， little better than a technical farce.
It is amusing， if anything connected with this stupid catastrophe can be amusing， to see the secretly crestfallen attitude of technicians. They are the high priests of the modern cult of perfected material and of mechanical appliances， and would fain forbid the profane from inquiring into its mysteries. We are the masters of progress， they say， and you should remain respectfully silent. And they take refuge behind their mathematics. I have the greatest regard for mathematics as an exercise of mind. It is the only manner of thinking which approaches the Divine. But mere calculations， of which these men make so much， when unassisted by imagination and when they have gained mastery over common sense， are the most deceptive exercises of intellect. Two and two are four， and two are six. That is immutable； you may trust your soul to that； but you must be certain first of your quantities. I know how the strength of materials can be calculated away， and also the evidence of one's senses. For it is by some sort of calculation involving weights and levels that the technicians responsible for the Titanic persuaded themselves that a ship NOT DIVIDED by water-tight compartments could be "unsinkable." Because， you know， she was not divided. You and I， and our little boys， when we want to divide， say， a box， take care to procure a piece of wood which will reach from the bottom to the lid. We know that if it does not reach all the way up， the box will not be divided into two compartments. It will be only partly divided. The Titanic was only partly divided. She was just sufficiently divided to drown some poor devils like rats in a trap. It is probable that they would have perished in any case， but it is a particularly horrible fate to die boxed up like this. Yes， she was sufficiently divided for that， but not sufficiently divided to prevent the water flowing over.
Therefore to a plain man who knows something of mathematics but is not bemused by calculations， she was， from the point of view of "unsinkability，" not divided at all. What would you say of people who would boast of a fireproof building， an hotel， for instance， saying， "Oh， we have it divided by fireproof bulkheads which would localise any outbreak，" and if you were to discover on closer inspection that these bulkheads closed no more than two-thirds of the openings they were meant to close， leaving above an open space through which draught， smoke， and fire could rush from one end of the building to the other？ And， furthermore， that those partitions， being too high to climb over， the people confined in each menaced compartment had to stay there and become asphyxiated or roasted， because no exits to the outside， say to the roof， had been provided！ What would you think of the intelligence or candour of these advertising people？ What would you think of them？ And yet， apart from the obvious difference in the action of fire and water， the cases are essentially the same.
