INDRABARAH INQUIRY.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1800, 12 July 1913, Page 7

INDRABARAH INQUIRY.

.< 1 COURT'S FINDING, THE CERTIFICATES RETURNED. The Indrabarah inquiry was continued last evening. The Bench coDsistod of Dr. M'Arthur, S.M., and Captains Gillespie and Scott. Mr. P. S. h.. Macassey represented the Marino Department; Mr. M. Myers appeared for Captain Hollingsworth; Mr. A. Gray end Mr. P. H. Putnam for Chief Officer Stafford; and Captain Rainey for the owners of tho vessel. Additional evidence was given bv William Jackson, second engineer; Arthur L. Morris, chief engineer; Frederick Harry Saul, A.8.; Owen Rhoderick Evans, A.8.; and Ernest George Lang, A.B. Mr. Myers offered to call evidence respecting tho "set" in the locality of the mishap, but the Court stated that it did not think it necessary to hear it. , Mr. Macassey, addressing the Court, submitted that Captain Hollingsworth was guilty of negligence—that he did not tako proper precaution, considering tho existing weather conditions, for the protection and safety of the Bhip. Firstly, the cap- . tain should have kept tho vessel out to Bea till daylight, and secondly, he should have taken soundings. Mr. Myers addressed' tho Court with the object of showing that there had been no negligence on' th 6 part of tho captain. • The Court retired for ovor half an hour. On returning Dr. M'Arthur said that the first question tho Court had to decide was: What was the cause of the stranding? "Tho answer," continued Dr. M'Arthur, "is that the stranding was caused by the 6trong westerly wind carry- ' ing the vessel to tho south and east. Tho 6«cond question was : Whether the stranding was due or contributed to by the negligenco or wrongful act of the master or any certificated officer of the vesßel? The Court considers that the stranding was not due- to or contributed to by any negligence or wrongful act of the master or any certificated officor of the vessel, but is of opinion that tho master committed tin error of judgment in not heading more to westward and in going at a low rate of speed considering the direction and force of the wind and the weather conditions then prevailing. No blame is attached to the other offioers whose certificates have already been returned. The master's certificate is now returned and no order is made as to oosts. The first officer will receive three guineas' towards his costs, and tho second officer states that he has incurred no expenses." QUITE A _ NEW PHASE. CAN CREW CLAIM COASTAL PAY? It seems likely that a somewhat inr teresting point affecting the payment of wages •to the crew of tho Indrabarah will have to be settled. Briefly, the posi- ' tion. is as follows';— After discharging Home cargo at New .Zealand ports, the Indrabarah proceeded to various coastal jxirts, and took in cargo for London. When she went ashore on the Rangitikei Beach she had on board certain New Zealand cargo destined for London.' Sho came to Wellington, and transhippc-d some of this cargo to the Niwaru, which left port for London early this morning. It is thought that, on account of hav- - ing transhipped cargo (loaded at New Zealand ports and destined for London) to another steamer the Tyser Line have ipso facto become liable to pay the crew of the Indrabarah New Zealand'coastal rate of wages. The case is supposed to be similar to one decided by Mr. Justice Chapman on July 20, 1911, in which the Line, as owners of the steamer had to pay .her orew about in extra wages so as to make up tho difference between tho Home and New Zealand rates of wages. In the case, of tho Durham it will bo remembered that tho ship loaded cargo for United Kingdom ports at Auckland and Port Chalmors and Bluff. She also took on board Bluff cargo at Port Chalmers. Instructions wero then, received for the Durham to proceed to Wellington and tranship to the Sussex—a steamer belonging to the samo:owners,, destined for United Kingdom' ports. With- respect to the journey from the Bluff to Wellington tho owners of tho Durham admitted that • the ship was liable to pay New Zealand* 1 wages.' It -was decided, however, 'that the company had to' pay wages from the time that ' the " Durham' landed cargo at Auckland till she' arrived at Wellington. On another occasion the Shaw-Savill Company had to pay New Zealand coastal wages to seamen on one of their ships becauso she brought several hundred bags of copra from Auckland for transhipment to an outgoing mail steamer bound for London. Whether the fact <if tho Indrabarah having met with « nu'shap will make any difference remains to Ha seen. It is pointed out, howvnr. that Section 75 of the Shipping and Seamen Act. 1008, deals with 1 this case, : and also that there are no exemptions menti<m6d in it. It is understood that the local branch of the Federated Seamen's Union is moving in the matter. i\