The Feilding Star, Oroua & Kiwitea Counties Gazette. Published Daily. FRIDAY, DEC. 14, 1894. THE WAIRARAPA ENQUIRY JUDGMENT.

Feilding Star, Volume XVI, Issue 144, 14 December 1894, Page 2

The Feilding Star, Oroua & Kiwitea Counties Gazette. Published Daily. FRIDAY, DEC. 14, 1894. THE WAIRARAPA ENQUIRY JUDGMENT.

The judgment of the Court of Enquiry into the Wairarapa disaster has been delivered, and from a perusal of the full text of it there seems little doubt that as a whole it will be a just veHict. Blame is unsparingly laid upon those whose conduct undoubtedly merited it. The Captain was responsible for the loss of the ship ; the conduct of the Chief Officer was reprehensible in the highest degree— inhuman in fact; the third and fourth officers and the engineers did their duty faithfully ; a number of the passengers and ship's company are specially named for their bravery, . while the conduct of the stewardesses, "Those noble, heroic, self-sacrificing women who preferred death to neglect of duty and dishonor, is beyond human praise." Such are the chief comments upon the conduct of the lending actors in the weird sad drama. From a judicial view, the verdict is . doubtless a proper one. It is shown that had proper bearings been taken i l»y the officers after passing Cape Maria Van Diemen the ship's position could have been more accurately . ascertained. At one time we were of [ opinion that the first officer was being unfairly dealt with, because a recent . severe iUuesa had incapacitated him ; but new facts which were afterwards disclosed during the enquiry show that the verdict of the Court was justified by the neglect of this officer in failing to scud assistance to the I helpless people whom he saw floating to sea on a raft. No wonder the ■ Court characterised this officer's conduct as inhuman. In thus far agreeing with the finding of the enquiry we but echo the popular verdict arrived at, but we are equally certain that it will not, in many important particulars, be at all satisfying to the unbiassed public, For instance the lay mind is not satisfied with the " mere statement of Mr Northcroft that the " So-called boat drill was a mere 1 farce, as each number of the crew - apparently did not know what was required of him in an emergency." It was not perhaps within the Board's province to say where the blame for this state of things lay — whether the company did not come in for a share i of it. If they were cognisant of the ■ fact that such an important regulation as boat drill was a dead letter on , the ill-fated ship, are they not guilty, ( to use a legal phrase, of contributory r negligence — a negligence fraught with the most serious consequences, for the Board of Enquiry has affirmed that it " Was maiuly owing to this waut of efficient knowledge in handling the boats that so many valuable lives were lost?" Aud if the Union Company has allowed this disregard of its boat drill regulation— and it is but too evident i — may we not doubt whether those rclatiug to coast navigation, fog precau- | tions, etc., are any more stringently enforced ? The whole burden of blame ; is laid upon the memory of the unfortunate Captain ; that is the verdict of the Court, and, as we have said, technically, it is probably a right one, yet, I are there not extenuating circumstances ? Captain Mclntosh erred ; in that ho was no worse than the best of his fellows, and, as has been truthfully remarked, had he got through to Auckland in safety, be would have maintained the reputation he already possessed of bomg a careful and skillful seaman. Then we are told by tho Court that a certain oceau current seemed to have assisted ' in the dreadful catastrophe, and that " This current appeared to be caused by 1 winds and storms on and near our coasts." It is not a fixed curront ; it is produced by local causes— tho direction and force of the wind. How is a Captain at sea to know what wiuds wero blowing at a given point 24 or 48 hours previous to his reaching there '? Aud yet the Court says that the Captain should bavo known of the direction and force of a current that was but a passiug 1 circumstance, and whose influence upon ' a steamer on this particular courso , might not bo twice alike. The Court is also of opinion that there is no' reason to doubt tho accuracy of the compasses. This is a question about which we might hesitate to be certain It is sufficiently demonstrated that compasses are liable . to become erratic iv proximity to an iron-bound coast, or when there is unusual magnetic disturbance, aud that 1 the risk of such is greater with large quantities of iron ou board. Theu the influences may be so counter, and powerful as to deflect tho best of compasses. The percentage of vessels that have gouo ashore with iron cargoes have placed tho question almost beyond doubt. The wreck of the Taiaroa at the Clarence river some eight years ago appeared to be a conspicuous case in point. Her cargo was composed chiefly of iron, the night thick and the land obscured. Her proper course was a bee line from "Wellington heads to Kaikoura peninsula. She had only made some fifty miles when she struck at the Clarence mouth. She romained iv the same position after having struck, and it was fouudthat her head had been turned j from tho proper course fully seven points. There must have been somoI thing unusually amiss for tho Wairarapa , to bo so far out of her course ; surely I uo ordinary current could carry her so ; far out in such a short distance ? MatI tors such as theso ought not to be left out when the blamo is beiug fixed. He who was responsible for the navigation of the ship is not hero to advance a plea iv his owu defence. His case looks > black, but who shall say what his mental condition was on that fateful J night ? If his judgment was beclouded > as a result of bodily weakness or dis- ' ease, then may wo well pause iv sadness ! from passiug censure upon him. Blameworthy or blameless his life has gone out in expiation, aud a juster tribunal than that of erring mortals should alouo pass the verdict.