BADEN POWELL MISHAP

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 156, 27 March 1920, Page 8

BADEN POWELL MISHAP

WHAT DID THE VESSEL STRIKE ? DECISION TO BE GIVEN TO-DAY J At the Magistrate's Court yesterday a t nautical inquiry was held into tho circumsbiuce of the accident to tho small coastal steamer Baden Powell, which r struck some object whilst on a voyago from Wellington to New Plymouth bef twoen February 17 and 19, 1920. . Mr. W. G. lliddell, S.M., was the chairman, and tho assessors wore Captain AV. ' Coziis and Captain C. M'Arthur. Mr. " J.' Ti. Prendeville. of the Crown Law Office, conducted the inquiry on behalf j of the Marine Departnieut, and Mr. E. K. Kirkcaldie appeare.d on behalf of the master of tho vessel, Captain H. P. a. " Olsen. i The vessel left "Wellington at 11.20 D.ni. on February 17, and experienced a . smooth sea with a light N.E. air. At 1 4.30 a.m. next day Brothers Light was abeam three miles off, and the weather t '. conditions were unchanged. Tho vessel 3 proceeded on a north-west by north . course, running for a distance of nineteen miles, when the weather got thick. , >ind heavy rain fell. At about 3 p.m. on February 18 Innd was observed in the 1 direction, of Mount Egmont, and the t weather was still thick. At 1.10, a.m. . on February 19 the ship touched some obstacle, hung a, few moments, then gatht od speed, bumped again twice, and then i commenced to make water. The appli- . cation of the pumps kept the inflow . down, and tho ship arrived at Ivqw Plymouth at 12.20 p.m. or. February 19. [ Captain Olsen said that about 1«10 a.m. I on February 19 he saw something dark on , the starboard bow. and tho helmsman . was ordered to put the helm hard a starboard. The vessel ran right round he i fore the first bump was felt. Then fol- . lowed two slight bumps, and vessel ap- , neared to drag for about three or foul 1 , minutes. Use was. made of the lead, but lie could get "no bottom." . To the Court: The vessel was nxamined i at New Plymouth, and it was found that ; she had touched something, hard. It . was the .first, trip he had made m tho vessel, and the first time lip had been on that portion of the coasti To Mr. Kirkcaldie: Ho was only asked i to relievo on the trip. There was nothing to lead him to believe that the . ship would not make the course set. Ho could not sav whether the vessel struck i land. .At midnight on February .18, tho nearest land point, according to the log, ' .was Otnmatua Point, which was ten miles off. Opunake Point should have been abreast at 3 a.m. on February 19. : He did not see any broken water befom or after the vessel, struck. , In reply to Mr. Prendeville, witness said he di'd not think he could have run on to the shoals off Opunake. The Shoals Off Opunake. William Eobert Williams", mate of the vessel said that shortly before midnight the rain stopped, but came on again, and (luring, the interval he caught, tho loom of what he took to be land in a .'lorth-weslerly direction. He told the captain this, but as it was raining hard tho captain could not see what witness had seen. Witness was asleep when tho bump came. Ho rushed on deck, cast Hie lead, and found the ship had stopped, Ho cast tho lead on the starboard side, and -got sft. The lead might have rosted on a rock or some kelp. _ . To the Court: Witness could not seo any land—ho could not see anything, '('here was hardly a ripple on the water, And it was still raining hard. To Mr. Prendeville: The diver's report on the vessel was that she. was scratched on the port side and the tips of tho propeller blades were bent. The sea at the time would .have a tendency to keep Hie vessel off the coast rather than on "•■■■' ~ . To Mr. Kirkcaldie: Wtiness could not tell "whether the lead touched submerged loss-or land. If-at 4 o'clock on the afternoon of February 18 the log registered CG miles, and at midnig-it it registered 90 miles, the vessel had only dono 24 milesMi little ' over three knots an hour. That teing the case, the vessel could have gone on till 3 a.m. on Februnrv 19 without any fear of danger if sho were in the position tho captain assumed her to'be. To Cantr.in Cozns: The lead was. armed." and when it was withdrawn from, tho water there' was nothing to indicate what the bottom was. He knew the sounding could not be correct, as it only showed sft.. whereas tho vessel was drawing 9ft. Gin. aft, and tho propeller was. still going round. Alexander Keith, A.B. on the vessel, also gave evidence, and ..in reply to the - Court, said that as a general rule the shiD sh cored badly. Ho did not ago • anything that lie could say was land. William Campbell, A.8., who relieved the witness Keith at the wheel, said that lie did not see any land or any signs of breakers. To the Court: It appeared that it was the stern of the ship which struck-somo-where aft of the enginei'oom. The Damage. William Edward James Graham, engineer of the vessel,!also gave evidence, and on being questioned about tho damage'and repairs, said that lie was unable lo say the extent, of the damage. Mr Prendeville stated that the vessel was on the slip at Lyttelton, and a wire from the owners said that the cost of repairs would amount to .111000." He con-1 sidered that this amount was probably wrong. ■. , , ~ Mr. Kirkcaldie said that such a statement could not be accepted as evidence. Mr. Hiddell considered. that the figure must be a mistake. It did not seem pos-1 « : ble that a vessel steaming three knots an hour could go aground foi 1 a .minute | and then sail off again and sustain damage to the extent of .£IOOO. Ho would not admit any reference to tho cost ot the damage excepting that which the witness actually 6aw. Continuing, witness said tha,. it had bcon necessary to burn new tips on to the propeller, and to renew several planks. J To llr. Kirkcaldie: Ho could not say whether the vessel struck a rock or j some other submerged object To Mr. Prendeville: He felt tho propelk Mr.' 'Kirkcaldie submitted that the Court had to decide whether the master was guilty of committing a wrongful act, or an error of judgment. He'submitted that Olsen was not guilty of any intentional taking of a risk or neglect, but bad apparently committed an error of imlement. Thero was no evidence to show that the vessel had actually gono ashore. What probably happened was that tho vessel struck some snag or other which .was common in those waters. . Decision was reserved till this morning.