Teamtuna,
Well I guess where Titanic was concerned we had the class system, but actually if we look around today at some of th cases in the headlines, the rich and powerful still get a few more breaks than middleclass, etc. but that is a whole nother forum<LOL>
Betty

I think the exoneration happened partially because class was still very much a force in 1912, and he belonged to the same one they did.

Teamtuna,
Oh I totally agree that they thought themselves "above" everyone and were definitely in the upper crust. It just was beyond me how Lord Mersey could exonerate them.

yes, I would say they only cared for one thing, themselves

It sounds to me like the Duff-Gordons may have been that kind of people that others aren't "real" to - just things, sometimes unfortunately in their way, but mostly unimportant. It took a direct coversation, for instance, for Sir Cosmo to even realize that the seamen in the boat had lost all they had - hardly the mark of a caring individual.

I think they could have at least gone to a part where it wasn't heavily populated and picked up at least a few people...and I agree with Betty that they should have been held somewhat accountable for not doing anything.

Yeah, I also heard that about them being swamped. I think that it was safer for them not to go back to try and get more people because of that reason also.

Titanic 4 ever,
yea I think that is what they thought at the time 1912, but in everything I read so far, they say there was no suction where Titanic going down was concerned?

The Duff Gordons had said they thought the people in the water would swamp their lifeboat but geez they could have picked up a few?

I still think they should have been held accountable (like Captain Lord) for not doing anything at all
Betty

I think part of the reason is because the ship would have pulled the lifeboats towards it as it went down so the lifeboats could not go back.

If there were a lot of "crew" passengers in the boat, could they not have said they were in charge and we are going back to pick up some more survivors? I just think it is terrible that they had room and did not help. I understand about their concern re: being swamped but they could have picked up some and pulled away?

And of course offering the men money whether for their kit or otherwise is going to persuade them not to pick up survivors if that is what he wanted. Geez
Betty

I found this in one of my books:
" The records recall the account of Charles Hendricksen, a fireman who was one of the 12 rescued in No. 1 lifeboat:
When the ship sank we picked up nobody. The passengers would not listen to our going back. Of the 12 in the boat, seven were crew. Symons, who was in charge, said nothing and we all kept our mouths shut. None of the crew objected to going back. It was a woman who objected, Lady Duff Gordon, who said we would be swamped. People screaming for help could be heard by everyone in our boat. I suggested going back. Heard no one else do so. Mr. Duff Gordon upheld his wife. After we got on the Carpathia, Gordon sent for them all and said he would make then a present. He was surprisedto recieve five pounds from him the day after docking in New York"

Another fireman, R.W. Pusey said:
'.........I heard Lady Duff Gordon say to Miss Francatelli:'You have lost your beautiful nightdress,' and I said:' Nevermind, you have saved your lives; but we have lost our kit;' and then Sir Cosmo offered to provide us with new ones."

In the Government Enquiry, it was found that " it is no part of the business of the court to enquire into such matters, and I should pass them by in silence if I did not fear that my silence might be misunderstood. The very gross charge against Sir Cosmo Duff Gordon, that having got into No. 1 boat bribed the men in it to row away from drowning people is unfounded. ......But I do not believe that the men were deterred....by any act of Sir Cosmo Duff Gordon's....."

WHEW!! That was long...does that help?? Lol