THE WARATAH.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1041, 2 February 1911, Page 5

THE WARATAH.

QUESTION OF STABILITY. by Telegraph -Press Association-Copyright. London, January 31. At tho Waratnh in<|iiii-y, counsel for the relatives of the lost passengers contended (hat Messrs. Lundf's letters . lo the builders were tho outcome of a serious discussion between Mr. Lund and Captai" H'-'ery relative to the vessel's stability. Counsel for the builders claimed that the experts' evidence proved the stability of Ihc vessel, ami that the builder? were not responsible for any deviations in the plans made by the owners. ADDRESSES BY COUNSEL. (Eec. February 1, 8.55 p.inO London, February 1. At the Waratah inquiry counsel for the relatives declared that the evidence as to stability was prepared from data, not actual experience. The log showed that there had been trouble with the vessel on the first voyage. It was singular that Captain Ilbery did not communicate tho ship's behaviour to the owners, who certainly heard it from someone else. Counsel did not think it possiblo that a firm of integrity would write letters merely to get money from tho builders. Apparently it was desired to make a quick trip. Captain Ilbery placed coal on the 'siardeck, trusting not to encounter a storm. Counsel for tho builders contended that the evidence as to the stability was largely by depositions. Tho Court-had no rpportunily- of cross-examining. The vessel was built by a firm which enjoyed the confidence of the ship-owning classes, and was handed to the Lunds perfectly safe, if properly loaded and handled.

(Itec. February 1, 10.40 p.m.)

London, 'February. 1. Counsel for 'tho owners argued that it was likelier that tho Waratnh was lost in a storm, than through a breakdown from somo unexplained cause. He emphasised the important evidence that she had n long, slow roll, in contrast to the allegation of jerk. A ship might possibly bo tender while in a light condition, and quite stiff when loaded.

, THE OWNER'S STATEMENTS. The principal witness on behalf of the Blue Anchor Line was Mr. F. W. Lund,' son of. Air. William Lund, the senior partner. . ■ ■ Kegardhi" letters written.by his firm to Messrs. Barclay, Curie, and Co., the builders, stating that tho Waratah was not as-stablo as the Geelong, and that the builders would be held responsible for anything that might .happen if she was moved light in dock, Mr. Lund stated that in an interview which ho had with Mr. Peck, representing tho builders, he assured them that she had been moved in (lock at Glasgow perfectly light, and without any-balance, and that it would be quite safe to do so in London. They also discussed tho Hues of the ship, the question of her water ballast, and coal supply, and Captain Ilbcry's statement that in light trim the Geelona was a stiffer ship than the Waratah. Hβ might have said that Captain Ilbery had convinced him on this point, but Mr. Peck satisfied him that Captain Ilbery was wrong, and that the AVaratah in a light condition would be a stabler ship than the 'Geelong. He accepted the statement, as it was never a matter of serious complaint on tho part of Captain Ilbery. Mr. Bucknill (on behalf Of certain passensors): Did you ever write to the builders suggesting that the fact !«'f - tho Waratah not having.as nvuch. stability as the GeoloiiK might be a, ground for your getting back part of the purchase money or (retting some compensation from the builders? Witness:. No. ! lMien.all''HiQUetfers,;tliaj r ';vo)iJl(id written previously referring to tlis stability of the'Waratah. and the risk of moving her light in dock were merely bluff?— They were not serious letters. ■