Joseph George Scarrott : Titanic Survivor
Able seaman Joseph George Scarrott, was rescued and left a description of the shape, and colour of the iceberg.
www.encyclopedia-titanica.org
Joseph George Scarrott
- Thread starter Encyclopedia Titanica
- Start date
jennifer burton
Member
mr joseph scarrott, im pleased to say is and was my cousin im very proud that he saved the live of the people on life boat 14. he resembles my father, who to was a scarrott. j burton
Joolz Amanda
Member
04 AUG 1883 : Joseph's father Joseph Timothy Stephen states in personal column of Portsmouth Evening News that he will no longer be responsible for his wife's debts . This was not long after Josephs sister Elizabeth aged 11 months had died at Duke Street . Putting a notice in the newspaper was common amongst folk who wanted a divorce but couldn't afford one . Edwin who was born in 1888 is probably not Josephs brother .
Joolz Amanda
Member
15 SEPT 1907 Joseph George Scarrott marries Agnes Laura Payne in Southampton Registry Office . His first wife was still alive and living in Portsmouth . He married Agnes using the name George Scarrott ! In 1913 Joseph was stood in Portsmouth Courts and was accused of bigamy [ Portsmouth Evening News on Thursday 27th November 1913 - page 4. Under heading : BIGAMY CHARGE , Ex Naval Man sent for trial , First marriage at Kingston - Joseph gives his address as Church Street in Southampton ] . On 10 FEB 1914 Portsmouth Evening News , page 4 Joseph George Scarrott pleads guilty to Bigamy and is given one months prison sentence ! Joseph stated to his wife Agnes that he had one child [ George Joseph Scarrott born 1899 - 1903 ] which if the boy had lived he would have stayed with first wife ! Josephs first wife Annie had a sister , who was also in court that day she was ' Harriet Florence Garvey ' ; Annie's sister gave evidence of the fact that Joseph [ Annies husband ] had left her sister Annie in 1907 because of Annie's conduct ! Annie died in 1915 . Joseph then went on to marry for a third time to Elizabeth Minnie Henrietta Koster in Harringay Middlesex . Joseph is buried in Sutton Road Cemetery in Southend on Sea , Grave No : 10418 - Plot P . There is no headstone !
Joolz Amanda
Member
Joseph George Scarrott's sister : Portsmouth Evening News : dated 28 OCT 1882 : Yesterday afternoon another inquest was heard at ' The Dolphin ' [ Pub ] in Lake Road ; on the body of Elizabeth Bessie SCARROTT , three years of age [ she was actually 11 months old ] , the daughter of Joseph Scarrott a merchant seaman of Duke Street . The child had on the 20th instant , exhibited symptoms of measles and some medicine was procured from a neighbouring chemist for her but at 7.50 on Wednesday morning the mother found her dead in bed by her side . Dr Smart attributed her death to supressed measles and the jury returned a verdict in accordance to that opinion . The following year Joseph Timothy Stephen Scarrott puts a notice in local newspaper stating he will no longer be responsible for his wifes debts and it seems Joseph George Scarrott goes to live with his father as in 1891 census Joseph is staying with his father Joseph and Uncle George in 34 East Street Portsmouth .
John ford (3145)
Member
Is a very small world I just happen to randomly look up joseph scarrot because I Remember my grandmother telling me about him she was directly related to him her name was Joan Ford her mother was Alma Scarrot And father Major Tom Scarritt who started the Trinadad militia!
Arun Vajpey
Member
I am trying to find out exactly where A B Scarrott was just before the Titanic collided with the iceberg. I have not been able to find a definitive answer.
Can someone please direct me to a link which clearly states Scarrott's anatomical location (where on which deck etc) just before the collision?
Can someone please direct me to a link which clearly states Scarrott's anatomical location (where on which deck etc) just before the collision?
Kate Powell
Member
Have you seen this page from the Titanic British Inquiry?
There's some information about Joseph Scarrott's location in the testimony.
There's some information about Joseph Scarrott's location in the testimony.
TIP | British Wreck Commissioner's Inquiry | Day 2 | Testimony of Joseph Scarrott (Able Bodied Seaman, SS Titanic)
Electronic - Fully Searchable - transcripts of the complete U.S. Senate and British Board of Trade inquiries, and reports, into the sinking of the S.S. 'Titanic.'
www.titanicinquiry.org
Arun Vajpey
Member
I did but the sequence of the questioning confused me. I would have thought it was more proper to ask where Scarrott was at the time of the collision first and then about what he saw and felt. Therefore, when he started that he was on the Forecastle head, I wanted to confirm that he was there just before the collision and he was not referring to another timeline. In the previous sentence he talks about "5 to 8 minutes after the bells" etc.
Then he talks about seeing the iceberg after he came (back) up with his mate.
But if Scarrott was on the Forecastle Head just before the collision, he should have seen the iceberg closing right in front of him and the ship. Why does he not say so?
Then he talks about seeing the iceberg after he came (back) up with his mate.
But if Scarrott was on the Forecastle Head just before the collision, he should have seen the iceberg closing right in front of him and the ship. Why does he not say so?
Kate Powell
Member
I see what you mean. It would be strange if he hadn't seen it coming towards them if he had been on the forecastle head. He gives more information in this account saying that they all rushed up on deck to see what was the matter. Doesn't seem as if he was on the forecastle at the time of the collision.
www.encyclopedia-titanica.org
An account of the Titanic disaster by a survivor
"The night of April 14, 1912, will never be forgotten. It was a beautiful starlight night, no wind, and the sea was as calm as a lake, but the air was very cold."
Arun Vajpey
Member
That's what I meant. Scarrott says that he was "underneath the forecastle enjoying a smoke" when the collision occurred. Does he mean a deck below? Yet, he says he heard the 3 bells.
By trying to combine various somewhat disjointed statements it would appear that Scarrott was supposed to be on the forecastle head at the time (the man depicted there in Cameron's film?) but from his article we assume that he was on a lower deck in the same area having a smoke. That would explain why he did not see the iceberg as it closed in front of the Titanic (at least Scarrott does not say that he saw the iceberg at the time). He heard the 3 bells and after an interval felt the "vibration" from the impact. Scarrott describes that interval as "5 to 8 minutes" but that was not obviously the case; He then rushed up (to the forecastle deck, one assumes) and saw a lot of ice in the forward well deck and then - upon going to the starboard rail, saw the iceberg disappearing abaft of the starboard beam.
Most of what Scarrott says fits with Olliver's testimony except those "five to eight minutes" between the 3 bells and the first shock of impact. Clearly, the interval was more like 35 to 40 seconds but might have seemed longer to Scarrott.
But the point here is that Scarrott's testimony shows even more that the iceberg was not as close to the ship as Jim believes and also further undermines Boxhall's statements. There was a palpable interval between the 3 bells and the first impact.
By trying to combine various somewhat disjointed statements it would appear that Scarrott was supposed to be on the forecastle head at the time (the man depicted there in Cameron's film?) but from his article we assume that he was on a lower deck in the same area having a smoke. That would explain why he did not see the iceberg as it closed in front of the Titanic (at least Scarrott does not say that he saw the iceberg at the time). He heard the 3 bells and after an interval felt the "vibration" from the impact. Scarrott describes that interval as "5 to 8 minutes" but that was not obviously the case; He then rushed up (to the forecastle deck, one assumes) and saw a lot of ice in the forward well deck and then - upon going to the starboard rail, saw the iceberg disappearing abaft of the starboard beam.
Most of what Scarrott says fits with Olliver's testimony except those "five to eight minutes" between the 3 bells and the first shock of impact. Clearly, the interval was more like 35 to 40 seconds but might have seemed longer to Scarrott.
But the point here is that Scarrott's testimony shows even more that the iceberg was not as close to the ship as Jim believes and also further undermines Boxhall's statements. There was a palpable interval between the 3 bells and the first impact.
Samuel Halpern
Member
Scarrott was on duty at the time, but the on-duty deck crew were mostly hanging around the seamen's mess down on C deck, it being Sunday night. If he was stealing a smoke he may have been near to stairs going down the the seamen's quarters on E deck, possibly hanging around D deck near the door that opens into 3rd class open space just aft. He easily could have heard the 3 bells from there and ran down the stairs there to inform his mate in the seamen's wash place on D deck just below that something was spotted ahead. He wouldn't know what it was, but things like that didn't happen often on the open sea. When the ship struck he would have run up the stair there to go out onto the forward well deck to see what happened along with all those who awoke from those quarters by the impact.
As far as his 7 or 8 minutes, I believe he was simply confused about those 3 bells and the striking of 7 bells indicating 11:30 that occurred about 10 minutes before the collision, or about 9 minutes before those 3 bells, when he was asked about the time. As he admitted, he really didn't pay much attention to the time when the ship struck. The 7 or 8 minutes have been cited by conspiracy theorists, or historical revisionists, to claim that the lookouts saw the berg when it was 2 to 3 miles away.
Arun Vajpey
Member
Thanks Sam. I can understand Scarrott feeling a bit overwhelmed at the British Investigation and the convoluted line of questioning by Aspinall would not have helped.
But his testimony does suggest that there was a significant interval between the 3 bells and the first impact, doesn't it?
But his testimony does suggest that there was a significant interval between the 3 bells and the first impact, doesn't it?
