Titanic 3rd-class menu

[AdamSmith]

[AdamSmith]

Second class -- better? Hmm...

...what are Yarmouth bloaters?!

[AdamSmith]

[AdamSmith]

Ahh! First class...

[AdamSmith]

[RA1]

Because you printed the 1st class luncheon first I, for a while, assumed that the uppity class did not rise until noonish.

Regardless of how much money I have or don't have, one reason I have so far not seriously considered Cunard lines is their continued emphasis on "class" or, perhaps in my estimation, lack thereof.

Best regards,

RA1

[AdamSmith]

Sorry, I posted these in the order I found them.

Re: "class," in her book The Tale of the Body Thief, Anne Rice has a passage set on the QE II which is faintly hilarious in its skewering the pretensions of people (and vampires! ) who fall for the ship's tacky faux-elegance -- e.g., wood-grain Formica all over the place, even in the top-tier Queen's Grill room, etc., etc.

[MsAnn]

Every cruise line engages in the 'class system'.

[RA1]

True. Most noticeably among the staff?

Best regards,

RA1

[AdamSmith]

So a Yarmouth bloater is apparently a type of salted and smoked herring:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloater_(herring)

...cured without being gutted, it says.

^^ van Gogh's take on 'em.

[wayout]

Cost of a ticket (one way) on the Titanic

• First Class (parlor suite) £870/$4,350 ($83,200 today)
• First Class (berth) £30/$150 ($2975 today)
• Second Class £12/$60 ($1200 today)
• Third Class £3 to £8/$40 ($298 to $793 today)

ref: http://www.keyflux.com/titanic/facts.htm

[RA1]

WOW.

Best regards,

RA1

[Guest lurkerspeaks]

of course if that happened today, there would be all kinds of lawsuits with huge payouts, making the original ticket prices nothing

[wayout]

Even back then it appears there were plenty of lawsuits. I would be interested to hear the specifics of how much was actually awarded in the end to the litigants. I suspect the outcome had it happened today would be quite different...

Lawsuits, The Titanic: A Sue-happy Society In 1912

February 2, 1998|By Deborah Hensler Special to the Los Angeles Times

Raise your hands: How many of you left the theater after seeing Titanic, saying something like this: ``Wow. Suppose that had happened today. Can you imagine all the lawsuits?''

By the time we reached our car, my friends and I were planning the class action and counting the punitive damages. ``I guess if they'd had our legal system then,'' said one, ``it would have been the end of trans-Atlantic travel.''

OK, so I hang out with too many lawyers. You were involved with the romance of Rose and Jack and didn't stop to think about the supposed ``litigation explosion'' of our own era.

But guess what: The historical record shows that the survivors and the families of the victims evidently thought lawsuit almost as soon as they dried off or heard the news.

For American litigants, a lot rode on the question of which nation's law was governing. If British law applied (because the ship was flying the British flag), then the Oceanic Steam Navigation Co., the Titanic's owner, would be liable for as much as $2 million. If American law governed (under an 1800s law passed to protect American shipowners), the total maximum damage award would be a mere $96,000. In 1914, two years after the disaster, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of American law and the shipping company.

Within a year of the disaster, survivors and victims' relatives had filed $13 million in claims, a figure that meant a lot more then. Neither rich nor poor were too shy to come forward, nor did gratitude for their miraculous survival preclude survivors from seeking recompense for every penny in property loss. Mabelle Moore sought half a million dollars for the loss of her husband and an additional $10,000 for the property he had on board. Mary Holverson wanted only $100,000 for the loss of her husband and $974 for his baggage but tacked on another $920 to erect a monument in his honor. Clara Frauenthal sought more than $20,000 for her diamond, sapphire and pearl jewelry. Then there was Mary McGovern, who initially wanted only $50 for two sunken Irish crochet collars. But after attending court hearings on the suit, she upped her claim to $70 to cover her time. As far as I can tell, Rose never tried to collect on behalf of Jack.

The litigation had all the ingredients of a contemporary megasuit. The shipowners argued that they should not be held to blame for an unforeseeable accident. The night was hazy, so the lookouts could not have made use of their spyglasses, even if that equipment hadn't mysteriously disappeared between Belfast and Southampton. Sailing across the ocean with only enough lifeboats for half the passengers complied with the letter of the English law. Even if the owners were held negligent, they shouldn't be forced to pay, because the passengers' tickets included language that limited the owners' liability.

The plaintiff attorneys first tried to break the caps on damages, then squabbled for months over their fees.

In the key trial, held in England, lawyers argued back and forth about the weather, the receipt of warning telegrams (hard to prove, because most of the operators went down with the ship) and whether Titanic was proceeding at an unsafe speed. Each side had its own experts with clashing opinions about the nature of icebergs and the effects of haze and calm waters on their visibility. The jury deliberated briefly and found for the plaintiff victims on some grounds and against them on others. The shipping company appealed, saying that the jury didn't know what it was doing.

So perhaps our own age is not peculiarly litigious. But I do know the title for the movie sequel: Titanic II, the Litigation.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1998-02-02/news/9801301206_1_shipowners-english-law-british-law

[Sharab123]

wow.

how the mighty have... drown