THE TRIUMPH.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1043, 7 January 1884, Page 2

THE TRIUMPH.

The Triumph enquiry closed so far as taking evidence is concerned on Friday evening, and Mr Hesketh said that the evidence adduced was all h 1 intended to offer on behalf of the captain, and Mr Brassey on behalf of the chief officer said he did not propose to call any evidence. Mr Hesketh then addressed the Court, pointing out that his object was shown in the first instance by broadly stating the captain’s explanation that he fell asleep on the bridge from exhaustion, and to refute the theory set up by Mr William-son-that the c.p;aiu was drunk. He would not take up time by dealing with the suggestion that the vessel was deliberately wrecked, for there was not a tittle of evidence to support it, nor was there the slightest motive shown. He then dealt with the evidence taken to show the perfect sobriety of the captain. > It was a pure case of misfortune, not accompanied by circumstance? of aggravation, and whatever the result of tha trial was it was the captain’s ruin. He fell asleep on his post, and wrecked a ship worth L 50,000. Mr Kesketh then dwelt on the evidence as to the efforts made to get the ship off. ‘ Mr Brassey addressed the Court for the chief officer, who he contended had carried out his duties, and that no blame was attached to him. Mr Williamson was about to address the Court, but Mr Hesketh contended .he had not the right of reply, this only being an investigation. The Chairman said this had been the rule.

Mr William on then addressed the Court. He should not have troubled the Court but for Mr Hesketh’s statement a) to the position he had taken up by attributing drunkenness to the captain. They all approached this case with diffidence; but here was the fact of a large steamer going on to the rocks, and the only alternatives which c >uld suggest themselves were either the captain and officers were helplessly drunk, or that the vessel had been intentionally driven ashore. They had it in evidence that there had been drinking going on, and the question arose was it not to some extent due to

this fact that the captain fell asleep on the bridge. He commented on the tact that there was no evidence regarding insurance on the ship, either from the captain ot Mr Nathan. He also commented on what he considered to be phe gross want of discipline, which he said was manifested by the fact of going to sea with tile telegraph broken do wn, and n.) bhfe tplaoed to obhiey messages to the engine-room from the bridge, or any man placed between the look-out and the man at thc yheel, Ha also dwelt on the necessity of the chief officsr having supported the captain, especially when he knew his exhausted condition. . Ho asked the Bench

t ) cancel the captain’s certificate, who admitted that he fell asleep at his post. He was not- fit to' haVb-thb 'command of a ship and lives. As to the chief officer, he was not free from blame, and should be made to bear a proportion of the costs. As to the second officer, there did not

seem to be any special blame attributable to him further than he had pointed oat in ■ his general remarks. The Court reserved judgment until today. It was stated, possibly os a joke, that Mr Hesketh was about to flood the Court, with witnesses to prove that it was impossible to-float the ship off the rooks of Tiritiri, but the fact that at this time the Triumph hai been floated off, and was then safely riding at anchor in the harbor, rendered such evidence unnecessary, and worse than useless. It was hat fair, however, to state that Mr Hesketh denies having had any intention of producing

such evidence. Mr Fraser anticipates the Triumph will be ready for docking within & month from the present time. It has been decided she will be placed in the Auckland dock, bat it is well known that it will require bo be enlarged for the purpose and as y& ho conclusion has been arrived at as to ihs best method of getting over the difficulty. Among the numerous suggestions? Which have been made with reference to the repairing and refitting of the Triumph one has emanated from Mr Fisher, chief engineer of the vessel. He approves of the erection of a coffer dam at the mouth of the dock, giving it an additional length of about 30ft. The vessel, he says, should be placed in the dock, and when the water has been pumped out an inspection of the damages should be made, and drawings prepared, showing, the exact extent of breakage in the vessel’s bottom. A number of large iron plates will be required for repairs, and it is principally with the object of replacing them that Mr Fisher suggessa; sketch should be made, for is of opinion.that they should be p •• nr* d from the builders of the vessel. Hi# proposal is that the Triumph should be docked for ten "days, which would permit of a th.trough examination being made, and that she should then be floated out and anchored in the stream until the plates arrived from Home, when she could be again placed in the dock and made almost as good as new. Whether or bot these suggestions will bo carried out remains to bo decided by Mr Fraser, wh6 is flow giving the whole subject his attention.