🚢 RMS Titanic Lifeboat 1 – The Millionaire’s Boat and Its Controversial Escape

📌 Explore the infamous story of Titanic’s Lifeboat 1, also known as the "Millionaire’s Boat." Learn about its underfilled departure, the bribery accusations, and the survivors who faced public backlash. Discover firsthand accounts, rare images, and the ethical debates surrounding one of history’s most controversial lifeboats.

RMS Titanic Lifeboat 1 – The Millionaire’s Boat and the Controversy That Followed

🔍 Overview: The Story of Titanic’s Most Controversial Lifeboat

Lifeboat 1, often referred to as the "Millionaire’s Boat," became one of the most controversial aspects of the Titanic disaster. While it had the capacity to hold 40 people, it was launched with only 12 occupants—a decision that later sparked public outrage and accusations of favoritism, cowardice, and bribery.

The occupants of Lifeboat 1 included several wealthy first-class passengers, most notably Sir Cosmo and Lady Duff Gordon, along with a handful of crew members. Their actions—or inactions—on that tragic night were scrutinized in the official Titanic inquiries, with some claiming they ignored the cries of drowning passengers and even bribed the crew to row away from the wreckage rather than attempt rescues.

One of the "Titanic's" Lifeboats Approaching the "Carpathia," Barely Half Full. © Underwood & Underwood. The Literary Digest (4 May 1912) p. 919. GGA Image ID # 1085e15b3a

Lifeboat 1 turned out to be the omen of what would transpire with the other 19 boats. It was the fourth boat launched at about 1:05 am with only 12 people on board (2 Women and 10 Men), representing 30% of her capacity of 40 people.

The occupants of lifeboat 1 were rescued by the Carpathia shortly aft 4:10 am, the second lifeboat from the Titanic to be picked up. The lifeboat's occupants had a group photograph taken on the Carpathia.

Survivors of the Titanic and Occupants of Lifeboat 1 Rescued by the Carpathia. Back Row: Saloman, Stengel. Middle Row: Hendrickson, Lady Duff Gordon, Francatelli, Sir Duff Gordon, Taylor. Seated: Symons, Horsewell, Collins, Pusey. Dated 15 April 1912. GGA Image ID # 10d43fefa0

Facts About Lifeboat 1 (LB-1)

• Boat No. 1 was one of two small "emergency" wooden cutters
• No. 1 was on the starboard side.
• The lifeboat had a capacity of 40 people
• Most of the occupants of Boat 1 were men, despite Captain Smith's call for "women and children first."
• The boat was hoisted aboard the Carpathia along with other Titanic lifeboats and brought to New York.
• On April 16, the day after their rescue by the Carpathia, each crew member pm Lifeboat 1 received a £5 cheque from Cosmo Duff Gordon that represented about one month's wage for the crew.
• Lady Duff Gordon was the founder of and chief designer for Lucile Ltd, considered the first global couture house.
• Named the ‘Millionaire’s Boat’ by the press, who accused the occupants of ignoring cries for help from people in the water.

Lifeboat 1, the fifth one launched at 1:10 am, located on the officers deck, starboard side, with 12 occupants comprised of First Class passengers and Crew Members. Capacity for the lifeboat was 40 (30% of Capacity).

First Class Passengers - LB-1

1. Sir Cosmo Edmund Duff Gordon (49)  London, England, UK
2. Lady Lucille Wallace (Lucy Christiana) Duff Gordon (née Sutherland) (48)  London, England, UK
3. Miss Laura Mabel Francatelli (31)  [Secretary to Lady Duff Gordon], London, England, UK
4. Mr. Abraham Lincoln Salomon, (43)  New York, New York, US
5. Mr. Charles Emil Henry Stengel, (54)  Newark, New Jersey, US

Deck Crew Members - LB-1

1. Able Seaman: Mr. Albert Edward James Horswill (33)
2. Lookout: Mr. George Thomas Macdonald Symons (24) -> In Charge

Engineering Crew Members - LB-1

1. Mr. Samuel Collins, (35)  Fireman/Stoker [LB-1]
2. Mr. Charles Osker Hendrickson, (29)  Leading Fireman [LB-1]
3. Mr. William Robert Holland Pusey, (24)  Fireman/Stoker [LB-1]
4. Mr. Frederick Sheath, (20)  Trimmer [LB-1]
5. Mr. James Taylor, (25)  Fireman/Stoker [LB-1]

Legend For Survivor or Lost Passengers and Crew Members

• LB-# or A-D - Survivor on Lifeboat 1-16 or Collapsible Lifeboat A-D
• P-BNR - Perished, Body Not Recovered or Body Not Identified
• MB – CS Mackay-Bennett (bodies 1–306)
• M – CS Minia (bodies 307–323)
• MM – CGS Montmagny (bodies 326–329)
• A – SS Algerine (body 330)
• O – RMS Oceanic (bodies 331–333)
• I – SS Ilford (body 334)
• OT – SS Ottawa (body 335)

Numbers 324 and 325 were unused, and the six bodies buried at sea by the Carpathia also went unnumbered. Several recovered bodies were unidentifiable and thus not all numbers are matched with a person.

Upon recovery, the bodies of 209 identified and unidentified victims of the sinking were brought to Halifax, Nova Scotia. Of those, 121 were taken to the non-denominational Fairview Lawn Cemetery, 59 were repatriated, 19 were buried in the Roman Catholic Mount Olivet Cemetery, and 10 were taken to the Jewish Baron de Hirsch Cemetery. The bodies of the remaining recovered victims were either delivered to family members or buried at sea.

Every fair-minded person must deplore what passed at the Titanic Court of Enquiry proceedings last week. The Court was constituted by the Board of Trade, a government department responsible for regulating maritime affairs, acting under pressure of public opinion, to enquire into the causes of the disaster of the Titanic and the resulting heavy loss of life.

It was indeed never intended that it should resolve itself into a species of Court of Star Chamber to torture witnesses who were fortunate enough to survive and to cast the gravest reflections on their characters and conduct during those two tragic hours that elapsed after the Titanic received her death-wound.

Still, less was the Court constituted that efforts might be made by irresponsible counsel, who have never known any emer- agency except the belated arrival of briefs, to stir up class against class to prove that undue preference was shown to the aristocrat and the wealthy.

Yet almost the whole of last week's evidence was taken up in endeavoring to prove, both by counsel on behalf of the Crown and by various other counsel representing Seamen's Unions, Stokers' Unions, and third class passengers, that Sir Cosmo and Lady Duff-Gordon were responsible for the fact that Lifeboat No. I only contained twelve people instead of its full complement of 40.

Torquemada never placed his victims more unfairly on the rack of the Inquisition than Sir Cosmo and Lady Duff-Gordon had been placed on the rack of cross-examination. Every counsel, from the Attorney-General, Sir Rufus Isaacs (from whom one at least expected some semblance of fair play), to Mr. Harbinson, who put the climax on the proceedings by his scandalous question: "That is to say, you considered when you were safe yourself, all the others might perish ? "—at which point Lord Mersey saw fit to intervene for the first time, has endeavored to prove by the most skillful cross-questioning, by suggestio falsi, and by every other weapon in the armory of the skilled cross-examiner, that Sir Cosmo Duff-Gordon induced the crew of No. 1 Lifeboat to row away from the sinking ship by offering them £5 apiece.

There is not one title of evidence to support this derogatory aspersion. The whole story rests on the belated declaration of a stoker called Henrickson that when someone suggested going back to pick up those struggling in the water, Lady Duff-Gordon remarked, "there was danger of their being swamped," and that she was supported in this attitude by Sir Cosmo Duff-Gordon.

Henrickson's evidence of this imaginary conversation is not supported by a single other person in the boat, all of whom deny they ever heard any suggestion to go back, except a fireman called Taylor, who says he listened to this suggestion but has not the slightest idea who made it Able seaman Symons, who was in charge of the boat, assumed full responsibility for all that occurred, and declared on oath that in his considered opinion it would have been most dangerous to have ventured amongst the drowning multitude and that he refrained from doing so to preserve the lives of those on board.

Now we come to the incident of the $5 notes, of which so much has been made. What are the plain facts? Long after the cries of the drowning had ceased, the stoker Taylor, who was sitting on the same thwart with Sir Cosmo, turned to him and spoke about the loss of his kit after that, Sir Cosmo, taking compassion on the unfortunate plight of these men, who had lost everything they possessed in this world, offered them £5 apiece with which to purchase immediate necessities, and said he would cable the news of their safety to their relations.

Was there ever a more natural action for a gentleman to take? Would not anyone almost miraculously preserved from a fate that had overwhelmed so many have adopted the same course? Yet, on account of this harmless act of gratitude and charity, Sir Cosmo has been held up to public vilification.

Every unworthy motive has been attributed to him, not only by the counsel for the Crown but by the lesser lights who, taking their cue from the attitude of their seniors, have also sought to make Sir Cosmo a victim.

But all the efforts of the counsel for the prosecution (for they can only be described as such) failed to prove that either Sir Cosmo or Lady Duff-Gordon had ever said a single word against going back or that they had attempted to induce the crew to row away from the scene of the disaster by offering them a monetary reward.

Thus thwarted in his aims in one direction, the counsel engaged in the case sought to catch him in another. Sir Cosmo was attacked, not because he had suggested allowing those struggling in the water to drown, but for having failed to order the boat to go back and pick up as many as it would hold.

Every effort was made to prejudice the case against him. He was told openly that he had behaved ungentlemanly and cowardly and was accused of having made no effort to save anyone else once his own safety was assured. Is there any evidence whatsoever to support this allegation?

Sir Cosmo and Lady Duff-Gordon owed their places in No. 1 Lifeboat was simply a fortunate chance, which caused them to stand by the only remaining boat on the ship just as it was being lowered. There were no other passengers except two American gentlemen and their secretary; Mr. Murdock, the Chief Officer, was filling it up with the stokers and crew.

He readily accorded places to the Duff-Gordons and the other passengers who were present and then personally superintended the lowering of the boat. He apparently gave vague orders to row about two hundred yards away and await events.

The evidence of how far the boat went from the ship varies from one hundred to one thousand yards. It was nearer the latter figure than the former. In this position, No. 1 Lifeboat remained until the Titanic sank.

The appalling nature of the catastrophe has unnerved all. Horsewell, who, except for Symons, was the only other sailor in the boat, admitted that it never occurred to him to go back and rescue anyone and declared that no one ever made such a suggestion.

When pressed, he declared his mind was so muddled by what he had gone through that he could not recall anything that had happened. This was the state of all on board; they seemed to have temporarily lost their heads and rowed aimlessly about without knowing what they were doing or where they were going.

Some witnesses even declared that the boat was put back and endeavored to pick up some of those struggling in the water, but they could find no one. All this may be regrettable, but there is insufficient evidence to build a grave accusation of cowardice and callousness. Imagine a lot of these unfortunate people.

Two hours before, they had been comfortably asleep on board a ship that experts declared practically unsinkable. They suddenly found themselves, slightly clad, bundled into a small boat on a night in an almost Arctic atmosphere. They were all strangers of different nationalities, professions, and classes. There was no officer or person accustomed to command, capable of giving orders or organizing the rowers and fixing on some point for which to make.

There is no evidence to show that anyone in No. 1 Lifeboat, at the moment the Titanic sank, knew how many people were on board the boat or how many she would hold. She was burdened with oars, masts, and sails. In the darkness of the night, she seemed tiny, sad, and crowded, and all on board knew that if a sea got up, they were doomed to a watery grave. No wonder seaman Horsewell declared in his evidence that he could recall nothing clearly when the Titanic sank. That was everyone's state of mind.

Take the case of Lady Duff-Gordon. She had behaved with devotion and heroism, having refused the offer of a place in one of the first boats, preferring to remain and take her chances with her husband. In the boat, she became violently seasick, which everyone with an ounce of experience knows unbalances the mind and causes the sufferer to lose all interest in their surroundings.

Yet in spite of these indisputable facts, counsel has made every effort to prove that she deliberately advised the crew to refrain from venturing amongst the drowning multitude, as they might be swamped.

Even if she had done so—and there is not a whit of evidence to support the assertion that she ever said anything—her conduct would be pretty understandable to those who have suffered from the most distressing and nerve-destroying of all complaints. Let us see, for instance, how an acknowledged hero behaved under similar circumstances.

Recall what happened in 1798 on board the Vanguard, Nelson's flagship, when she was caught in a terrible storm in the Bay of Naples. The Queen of Naples was on board with her children, Emma and Lady Hamilton.

The ship was in grave danger of sinking or being cast on the rocks. The scenes inside Nelson's cabin were awful; only Lady Hamilton kept her head and endeavored to comfort the others. The Queen of Naples' son died from seasickness in her arms.

What was the hero doing all this while? Did he go on deck and do his utmost to save the ship? Did he stay below and endeavor to ease the fears of his guests? Not a bit of it. He was so overwhelmed with seasickness that he retired to his bunk, took not the slightest interest in the ship or his lady friends, and remained there until the storm had abated.

Yet Nelson has the highest monument in London and is one of the greatest heroes of all time. Poor Lady Duff-Gordon, for behaving in the same way under similar circumstances, is accused of cowardice and threatened with a boycott of her dress-making establishment.

Sir Cosmo himself was busily engaged in looking after his wife and endeavoring to reassure her—doing far more than Nelson ever attempted to do under similar circumstances for the Queen of Naples and Lady Hamilton. Yet Nelson remains on his pedestal in Trafalgar Square. Sir Cosmo is held up before the public as a miserable, selfish poltroon. Such is the counsel's idea of fair play.

If, on that tragic night, no one in No. 1 Lifeboat displayed the very highest qualities of courage or self-sacrifice. No one showed themselves as possessing that coolness of brain in moments of danger, which can grasp everything and act as clearly as in normal times.

Has anyone, from the Attorney-General downwards, the right to base on this lack of those higher qualities an accusation of callousness and cowardice? There were other boats only half full; did they go back?

The scene in the Court on Friday will never be forgotten by those who witnessed it. It confirmed every word Mr. H. G. Wells recently wrote on the country's misfortune being in the lawyers' hands. There was not a single commonsense man of the world with any idea of fair play in Court.

None of the eminent K.C.s seemed to grasp the vast and essential difference between men's actions in times of great emergency. They appear weeks afterward at a Court of Enquiry when the danger has passed, and the setting is different—no one in No. 1 Lifeboat had been guilty of any act for which his conduct could be questioned by anyone the least aware of the effect of cold, danger, shock, and seasickness on human nature.

Some men rise to an emergency, but are very few and far between. As they poured forth those bitter questions, I wondered if any of those eminent K.C.s had ever taken the trouble to reflect on what his own conduct would have been under similar circumstances. Indeed, there was nothing to suggest in their methods of conducting the case that any of them would have proved himself a hero.

It was not an inspiring spectacle to watch that row of lawyers increasing the sufferings of those who had just passed through the most awful ordeal that a man or woman can be called upon to face. We heard a great deal of the foolish questions of a sure Senator Smith of Milwaukee and the brutal nature of the attacks made in the United States on Mr. Ismay.

However, none of Senator Smith's questions were as foolish, and none were as brutal as many of those put to the survivors in No. I Boat by the lawyers engaged in the case. Lord Mersey had no power to put a summary check on this cruel inquisition. At any rate, he made no effort to do so until one of Mr. Harbinson's questions induced him to intervene.

There are better procedures than this one to arrive at the truth. Many witnesses will be scared from giving evidence because they fear their conduct being questioned. I could not help thinking as I watched the proceedings on Friday what a pity it is that all the lawyers engaged in this intolerable inquisition could not be turned adrift in open boats for a few hours on a winter's night in mid-ocean or made to swim about in a tank of iced water for half an hour before being allowed to call in question the conduct of those who had just passed through such ordeals. If this course were adopted in the future, we should hear fewer foolish and futile questions and nothing more of these baseless accusations of cowardice and misconduct.

E. Asmead-Bartlett, "Enquiry or Star Chamber," in The Academy and Literature, No. 2090, 25 May 1912, pp. 661-663.

This historical analysis of Lifeboat 1 is essential reading for teachers, students, genealogists, and historians, as it offers:

✔ A detailed look at the lifeboat’s launch and its controversial aftermath

✔ A glimpse into class divisions aboard Titanic

✔ Eyewitness testimony from survivors

✔ An exploration of maritime ethics during life-and-death crises

📌 A Lifeboat That Was Barely Filled – A Missed Opportunity to Save More Lives

Launched at 1:05 AM, Lifeboat 1 carried only 12 people (out of a 40-person capacity), making it one of the most underfilled lifeboats on the Titanic.

Two women and ten men were aboard, contradicting the general order of "women and children first."

It was one of the first boats rescued by the Carpathia at 4:10 AM, and its survivors were later photographed on the rescue ship.

📜 Notable Image: 📷 "One of Titanic's Lifeboats Approaching the Carpathia, Barely Half Full."

✔ This image visually captures the tragedy of underutilized lifeboats, showcasing how more lives could have been saved.

📜 Why This Matters:

✔ Highlights the inefficiencies and confusion during Titanic’s evacuation.

✔ Raises ethical questions about who was allowed onto the lifeboats.

✔ Shows how human error and panic played a role in the disaster.

📌 The Passengers of Lifeboat 1 – The "Millionaire’s Boat" Controversy

Among the five first-class passengers were Sir Cosmo Duff Gordon, Lady Lucile Duff Gordon, and their secretary, Laura Francatelli.

The rest of the occupants were crew members, including firemen, stokers, and an able seaman who took charge of the boat.

The press accused the wealthy passengers of preventing the crew from rescuing others, leading to a scandal and court inquiry.

📜 Notable Image:

📷 "Survivors of the Titanic and Occupants of Lifeboat 1 Rescued by the Carpathia."

✔ A rare and powerful photograph showing the occupants who became central figures in the post-disaster controversy.

📜 Why This Matters:

✔ Illustrates how class divisions influenced survival rates.

✔ Encourages discussion on ethical dilemmas during disasters.

✔ Gives a face to those at the center of Titanic’s most debated lifeboat.

📌 The £5 Bribery Allegation – Did Wealth Save Them?

Rumors quickly spread that Sir Cosmo Duff Gordon had bribed the crew with £5 each to row away and avoid rescuing others.

Some crew members later testified that no such bribe took place, but the press and public opinion condemned the Duff Gordons.

At the British Inquiry, no evidence of bribery was found, but the event damaged the reputation of the survivors in Lifeboat 1.

📜 Why This Matters:

✔ Exposes how public perception can shape history, even without concrete evidence.

✔ Highlights the role of wealth and privilege during Titanic’s sinking.

✔ Raises questions about survivor bias and survivor guilt.

📌 The Ethics of Lifeboat 1 – Could More Have Been Saved?

Some witnesses claimed Lifeboat 1 never attempted to go back for survivors, despite hearing the cries of drowning passengers.

Seaman George Symons, in charge of the lifeboat, defended his decision, stating that returning could have swamped the boat.

Lady Duff Gordon was accused of urging the crew to row away, though she denied making such statements.

📜 Notable Image:

📷 "The Last Goodbyes – Placing Women in the Lifeboats."

✔ A powerful image representing the chaos and tough decisions made during the sinking.

📜 Why This Matters:

✔ Encourages debate on whether more lives could have been saved.

✔ Provides insight into decision-making in moments of crisis.

✔ Challenges the reader to consider what they would have done in that situation.

📚 Relevance for Different Audiences

📌 🧑‍🏫 For Teachers & Students:

✔ A compelling case study on social class and survival ethics.

✔ Promotes discussions on disaster response and human behavior.

✔ Encourages critical thinking about how history is recorded and perceived.

📌 📖 For Historians & Maritime Researchers:

✔ Provides firsthand accounts and testimony from the British Inquiry.

✔ Explores how Titanic’s legacy shaped maritime laws and ethical debates.

✔ Examines the role of media in shaping the public’s understanding of historical events.

📌 🧬 For Genealogists & Family Historians:

✔ Gives insight into the survival stories of Titanic passengers.

✔ Helps those researching ancestors who may have been aboard Lifeboat 1.

✔ Offers a glimpse into how individuals were scrutinized after surviving the tragedy.

🌟 Final Thoughts: The Lasting Debate Over Lifeboat 1

📌 The saga of Lifeboat 1 is one of Titanic’s most enduring controversies, raising questions about:

✔ Ethics in survival situations – Should the boat have gone back?

✔ Wealth and privilege – Did social class influence survival?

✔ Truth vs. public perception – Was the bribery scandal real or media sensationalism?

📌 This article provides a fascinating look into one of the Titanic’s most infamous lifeboats. It serves as a historical case study on human behavior, disaster ethics, and the media’s role in shaping history.

🚢💔 Lifeboat 1 remains a reminder that, in times of crisis, the choices we make can define our legacy forever.