PURE HYDROSTATICS.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 820, 18 May 1910, Page 6

PURE HYDROSTATICS.

DUCO CASETHE LAST WITNESS CALLED. COUNSEL OPEN. The seaworthiness of tho steamer Due &t tho commencement of her fatal voyag —a question upon which tlio owner: claims for insurance are held to depend,was further investigated in the Suprem Court yesterday, before Mr. Justice Chaj man and a special jury of twelve. ; The Wellington Harbour Ferries limited, claimed from the Corporation o the Royal Bixhange Assurance the sum o .£SOO insurance money on the Duco, plu interest and legal costs. Other claim are jwnding, the total sum for which til Duco was insured with several companie being .£'2ooo. Plaintiffs were represented by Mr. C P. Skerrett, K.C., and Mr. F. G. Dalziel! and defendants by Mr. J.. H. Hosking K.C., Mr. A. A. S. Menteath.'and Mr. TV H. D. Bell. A Glance af History. Draycot Birkett, of Dunedin, nara architect, further cross-examined by Mr Bell, said that the deduction from tin evidence of a previous witness was tha the Duco had fulfilled all the designs o: her builder in tho trade for which shi was intended. This witness .had show: that the boat had a large range o; stability when ho stated that sho hac heeled over very far and still rccoverei herself. Shipbuilders did not construe vessels of extra ol stability excel) for exceptional services. There, could b no doubt as to the • Duco's equilibriun when she heeled; her range of stability rendered her a safe ship up to certaii reasonable limits. Witness was also asked by Mr. Bel whether ho remembered the trouble abou one of the Koyal yachts owing to' error in construction. -He replied in the nega tive.. He was also questioned about thi British warship, Captain, which wen down in 1870. He thought ■ the . presen system of calculation had not at that tinn been perfected. His Honour: They had the papers ii the offieo and calculated it all out after wards: Mr. Bell: And there is a tablet in St Paul's Cathedral explaining the cause o the disaster, and attributing it to ai error in calculating the metac«ntre. . His Honour: She was a turret ship witl a good deal of top-weight, and she wen over through .wind pressure in the pre Eenec of the rest of tho fleet. Witness said the case was mentionet in text books as an example of faulty calculations. It was only in the 19tl century that the principles now reliec upon wero applied. He did ■ not knov whether it was since 1870. Another Naval Architect. Hugh M'Hae, consulting marine arclii tect, Dunedin, said he had made calcula tions about the Duco independently o] . Mr. Birk'etfs. He had proceeded in th( sane way; as that witness in asoertainini the centre' of gravity, the centre ol buoyancy, and the metacentre. Ho pui the weight of the Duco imd her ■ cargt at 274 tons. He calculated that the cen tre of gravity was 8.02 feet above till top of the keel, that the' centre of buoy mcy was 6.4 feet above the top of the Veel and the metacentre 10.21 feet abovi tho top of the keel. The metacentric height .was therefore 2.19 feet, or nearly 2ft. 2Jin. He had to estimate the centre of gravity of each of the items of shij and loading, and he would place the margin of error at i inches. He had calculated the statical stability of the Ducc over large angles of inclination, and found that the righting moment was verv satisfactory. Mr. Skerrett to the Jury. Mr.. Skerrett. then addressed the jury. He pointed out that it,was not alleged in the pleadings that the Duco was unfii for the venture on which she', was lost, The question was, therefore, was she properly loaded? Sho was insured as r ship going to the Chathams, and tho insurance companies knew this, and had her inspected. They no doubt based the premium upon their knowledge of the risk. > The first question as'to seaworthiness was: Is it proved that the Duoo was so deeply loaded as to be unsafe: -The second was:. Is it proved that she was so improperly loaded that her stability was destroyed or rendered unsafe? Those were the two main questions, and he would add a third: Is it proved that the deck cargo rendered the ship unseaworthy by interfering with the navigation of the ship or with the steering gear? ° Important Question Involved. The case involved the important question whether owners were entitled to load their ships down to the Board of Tr-ado loaa-line. If-not, our ships would be at a great disadvantage against those of foreigners; and how else was an. owner to be guided if not by the legal loadline.' . ilie difference between a tug and a cargo boat was merely the difference in the amount of cargo that could be earned. As to the stability of tho Duco when fine left "Wellington for the last time, counsel ' contended. that the evidencc for the defence merely amounted to the fact that the loading and the structural alterations tended to raise the centre of gravity. Anyone oould have told them that, and tho statement was quite valueless without some calculation as to the extent to which the centre of gravity was lowered, and its position relatively to the uvetttccntTC. "Set no such calculation was made by the defence, Dealing with the calculations as to the • metacentre, etc., given in tho evidence tor tho plaintiffs, counsel submitted that notwithstanding some UDcertaintj* as tc some j of the weights which constituted the data of the calculations, they were substantially correct. Two witnesses had assured them that tho margin of error in.the ascertainment of tho centre of gravity was only 4 inches, and that wa< a negligible difference. Tn each of the results of the calculations the margin ui tho # error was so small as not to affect their conclusion as to tho stability of the 6hip. Mr. Hosking had pooh-poohed the metacentre, but it was employed in na<al designing everywhore. Mr. Hosking's Address. Mr. Hosking contended that the motive of the plaintiff company need not be considered. The question was whether the ship was, in fact, unseawortliy. If the servants of the company loaded the ship improperly, the company was responsible. The load-line was put on the Duce at Home to enable her to ciear for the purpose of coming out hero as a sailing vessel. Sho was not re-examined by Ivew Zealand Government officers for the purpose of again locating a load-line. The old marl: was painted out, and nobody thought any more about it. Tho vessel was not built for carrying deck cargo. The coal on deck, counsel suggested, was not lashed. Tho fact that Waddilove kept a piece of ropo for "lashing Oil any odd job" did not prove that ho meant to lash it. Tho coal was jammed in tightly, as though it wero not to be lashed, and this would make it less easy to pitch if overboard. Tho bags were placed in such a position that it was not possible to put any lashings 011 and attach them to the stanchions. Alluding to the expert evidence, counsel remarked that the interesting discoveries as to metacentres and tho like had onlv been made in the last century. Yet long before that, seaworthy ships were built, and practical men, at their own peril, had to judge whether they were seaworthy or not. lie submitted that for the purpose of practically deciding whether a ship was seaworthy or not, tho judgment of practical men could not be lightly set aside. The case will lie resumed at 10.30 this morning when his Honour will sum up. NEURALGIA'. If the affected parts are bathed freely with ChambeTlain's Pain Balm those ■stabbing burning darting pains will soon disappear. Bub the Balm well in several times during the day, keeping the patient warm and out of the cold wind. Dozens of people suffering from nouralgia liavo been cured by tho uso of Chamberlain's Pain Balm.—Advt.