DISSECTING THE DUCO.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 816, 13 May 1910, Page 6

DISSECTING THE DUCO.

BUILD AND LADING. THE. MANY PHASES OF A LONG ; ■.'"■' CASE. "EXPERT" STAGE REACHED. The hearing of the claim of the Wellington Harbor Rsrries, Ltd., against the Corporation of the Royal Exchange Assurance was continued in the Supreme' Court yesterday by Mr. Justice :Chapman and a special jury of twelve. The claim was for insurance money on the steamer Duco (owned by tho plaintiff company), which was lost at sea on a .voyago to the Chatham Islands last September. Mr. C. P. Skerrett, K.C., and Mr. F. G. Dalziell appeared-for the plaintiffs; and Mr. J. H. Hosking, K.C., Mr. [A; A. S. Menteath, and Mr. W.' H. D. Bell for the defendants. The case was opened -on Wednesday by counsel for the defence, who sought to »how that plaintiffs had not complied with the conditions of the insurance policy, inasmuch as the Duco/was not seaworthy when she put to sea on her last voyage. The Duco was insured with several companies for amounts totalling ,£2500, and tho present case was understood to be tho first of a series.. The policy issued by the Royal Exchange Assurance was for -.£SOO, and besides that sum the defendants claimed interest at 6 per cent, upon it, and legal costs. .The case for the defence occupied the Court all day on Wednesday, and was resumed yesterday morning. "Like a Thames Sand Barge." Ernest Franklin, a clerk in the employ of the Westport Coal Company, said the Duco was supplied with 41J tons of- coat just prior to ner last departure for the Chathams. George Clark, who said he had been a seaman on the Duco for' fourteen years, said that he watched her steaming out of the harbour for the Chathams. She was very deep in the water; so deep, indeed, that sho reminded him' of a sand barge on the river Thames! He would.not have gone to sea in her in the state she was then in.

To Mr. Skerrett: Looking under the vessel's counter he saw that , the numerals on her stern-post were under water. The lower rim of the porthole was awash. His services had been dispensed with by the Ferry Company because he refused to do certain work on the steamer Admiral. Ho was rated as an able seaman, and had ■been 38-yeaTS in deep-sea ships voyaging to different parts of the world. To his Honour: He could not see the Plitnsoll mark on the Duco when she rtrent out. There was no Plimsoll mark on her. She was , quite differently trimmed from when she was used as a harbour boat. . Incident on the First Chathams Trip. 1 John Mtean, ironmonger, confessed to a liking for the sea. He was a .yachtsman, but went to sea on the Duco on her first trip to the Chathams. He was rated as an ordinary seaman. He assisted in the navigation of the ship and the steering. Early on the Sunday morning on the return trip, he was at the wheeL They were running before a fresh nor'-east. breeze and a heavy-sea. They -had a small try-sail to steady, the ship. The lading consisted of some boxes and about 11 tons of fish. The ship was rolling heavily, and once she took a heavier lurch than usual and did not recover. Witness called the mate, who was on the bridge. He wished to say in fairness, to the mate that the latter did not leave the. bridge from the time the vessel left Wellington to the time she reached the Chathams, nor from the time she left the Chathams until she again reached Wellington. ' ' . - Mr. Hosking: Do you know why he remained on the bridge?—He seemed to prefer the fresh air to the saloon..

Had it anything to do with, the state of the ship?— Not that I know of. Witness and the mate discussed the cause of the trouble,"''and'the mate after going. io see, came back and said the decks ivere full of water and the wash-ports closed. : Witness understood that the wash-ports were fast. The mate told him to put the ship's head to the wind. As to the trim of the vessel in smooth water, the-lowest part of the belting was about six inches above tho water. Amidehips it would be about a foot out of water. He .thought she was a good sea boat when head; to sea, but beam'on she Tolled rather badly. The captain inTariably kept her head to sea if possible on that cruise.

To Mr. Skerrett: He could not /give any idea of the angle of inclination "when the Dnco lurched over on the occasion he had alluded to, but the leeward bnlwarks must have been under water. He had to hang on to the wheel to leeward. There would be 13J tons of boxes of fish, and about 10 tons of coal on board. As he knew the Duco on the "first trip, ho wonld have 'been willing 'to tako the second'trip on her. He did not see her loaded the second time. : The Late Inquiry. Witness also said, in reply to Mr. Hosking, that he gave evidence at the Marine Department's inquiry into the loss of the Duco. , Mr. Hosking: What was the result of that inquiry? Mr. Skerrett: I submit that tho Court ougpit not to ba influenced in any degree by an inquiry which was held for :a different purpose, and at which diftferent evidence was given. His Honour said thai/if Mr. Hosking wished to tender the evidence given at the inquiry, he would have to argue the .point before him, and that had better bo done in his chambers. No Permit Required. Charles Stafford Nixon, Collector of Customs, Wellington, said the Duco did not have a permit to carry cargo on deck on the last voyage. •• To Air. Skerrett: A. vessel of the class of tho Duco on such a trip was not required, by the Department' to obtain a. permit to carry deck' cargo. (James Henderson, employee of Lysaght and Co., Ltd., said he saw tho Duco leave the wharf on her last trip. He 6aw about six concrete blocks on the forward side of the fore-hatch. They were about 2 feet square. 1 There was a boat lashed across tho fore-hatch. The- coal on deck was not lashed. .

Mr. Skerretfc cross-examined witness' as to the number and size of tho concrete blocks, and mentioned in reply, to a remark by Mr. Hosking that he'could prove that there were only four blocks, and that they measured li inches each way. The moral of my cross-examina-tion is, he remarked, "that everything eeeme k> bo exaggerated by your witnesses.,'

"Would Not Have Voyaged in Her." ■ John Patcrson, foreman of the Patent hhp, Wellington, for the last 28 years, said he was formerly at sea for three years. He had served an apprenticeship to shipbuilding. He had had the Duco on the Patent Slip many times. He did not consider the Dnco was a safe boat to go to the Chathams loaded as described for her last voyage. He would not have taken the voyage in her. The Duco was not built for carrying more than a small quantity of cargo. She was built for a towing boat. The effect of taking out the ballast and placing coal higher up in the ship would shift the centre of gravity to a higner point in the ship. This did not improve her stability. She should have had iron ballast under the coal. He did not think the Duco was fit to carry a deck cargo. It made her less fit for the voyage. To Mr. Skerrett: It was not always safe to load a vessel to the Plimsoll mark. The weight must be placed low enough in the ship. When the Duco departed, the weight was not too groat, but it was too high.. John M'Lean, recalled and questioned by the Bench, said that on the occasion during the Duco's first voyage to the Chathams, as already referred to in his evidence, the vessel righted herself when her head was put to the wind. Her inability to recover her position before wns due to tho water that had come on soard. and not to anything shifting. William Bendall, master mariner since 3357, and non-oxelusive marine surveyor lo the underwriters and Lloyd's Register of recent years, produced plans of tho Duco prepared by himself. If meant lor cargo carrying, she would not taper away forward and aft as she did. After

the structural alterations were made, and the ballast taken out last year, the new water-line forward was some inches below the old one. She was not a vessel that should have carried any weight on deck, because her stability wonld be weakened by taking the ballast out, .and the centre of gravity would be raised. He would not have loaded the I)uco as she was loaded on deck, neither would he have gone to sea with 10 tons of coal in bags stowed on the after deck unlashed. He came to the conclusion, at tho time ho surveyed her, that sho ought not to carry deck oargd. One could not have a much worse voyage to face than a voyage to tho Chatham*. Ho had been there himself, and had experienced very heavy weather. Ou tho day the Duco left, witness understood from Mr. Waddilove, the chief officer, that sho would 'not sail until. 3 p.m. Witness then said he would sco her off, but when 'ho returned to the wharf-lit 2.30, sho was out o'f sight. Ho remarked to Mr. Zohrab, who was on the wharf at the time.t that lie could see a southerly coming up. Hβ thought Captain Abram would anohor at tho Heads, and see the weight of it before going fnrther. If a southerly burst suddenly upon a ship carrying loose deck cargo, it would not take long to throw her on her beam! i ends. A prudant captain wonld throw the deck coal overboard before getting into a rough sea. Lloyd's Certificate. Mr. , Skerrett produce l , a document which defendant acknowledged' to be a certificate issued by Lloyd's in 1893, stating that the Dura was built in 1892, under Lloyd's supervision, and was classed as 100 Al. Witness said that the Duco did not remain in. that class because the re. quisite periodical examinations wcro not made. The Duco was not intended by Lloyd's to carry cargo. Mr. Skerrett: The certificate says: "Efficient to carry dry and perishable cargo." Would that not authorise the Duo to carry caigo up to her capacity? —Tes, if she was properly loaded. Was she, or was sbo not, fit to go to the Chatham; if properly laden, and her stability preserved?— "i es. The insurance companies knew that was the work sha was intended to perform? —Yes, I put it on my certificate. Witness also' said he could find no fault with the condition of tho hull, and tho Government inspect jr told him thf ma chinery was in.. first-clasa order. The equipment was sufficient. The Load-line. Sir. Skerrett: Would not a captain be justified in loading a vessel to the load-line?— Some vessels, but not others. The load-line might just as well be on the funnel as where it is on some ships. Witness said he could mention ships on which the load-lines fixed by Lloyd's tnd the Board of Trade were ioi hij;h. Ho was aware that French and German vessels were allowed to load more deeply than British.

Mr. SkOTett's cross-examination of this witness—mainly on technical questionsoccupied much of the afternoon Kitting. The Court adjourned until 10.30 o'clock this morning.