THE LOSS OF THE TAURANGA.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume 16, Issue 813, 15 August 1870, Page 3

THE LOSS OF THE TAURANGA.

Southern Cross, August 11J

We have hitherto refrained from commenting upon the circumstances attending r.he loss of the Tauraga, considering that it would not be proper to make any remarks unfavourable to the persons through whoso neglect the disaster occurred before the ollieial enquiry was concluded. Now, however, that the investigation is completed, and that the owner and master of the ketch Enterprise have received such punishment as they were considered to deserve, a few words of comment will not be out of place. First of all as regards the evidence given at the enquiry, it was-stated by both the owner and master that the sea was too rough for them to attempt ;o find out what damage they had done to the Tauranga, or to rescue the man whom they supposed to have fallen overboard. On the other hand, Mollis gave evidence as follows : —" We did not ship any water. The height of our covering- board, in smooth water, was fiva inches aft, and seven to eight inches amidships." Again, as to the practicability of getting up to the spot where the accident occurred, there is the one telling fact that Clifford earnestly besought the others to .endeavour to put back, thus showing that he at all events regarded this course as possible. It further appears that the boat 'was of a whale boat build. The above facts are most significant, and we confess that, bearing them in view, we can readily understand the reasons of the JNautieal Assessor for regarding the decision of the Justices, before whomt he enquiry was held 4 as too lenient.

The next point to which wa desire to allude is the non-possession by the master of a certificate of competency. The same, as appeared in the evidence, was the case with the master of the Cantero, and we have ao doubt that, if a list could be obtained of all the vessels trading to and from this port, it would be found that twothirds of those in command have no certificates whatever. This is to our minds evidence of a lamentable neglect on the part of the authorities. We hold that no man should be permitted to navigate any trading vessel without holding a certificate that he is competent to do so. There would be no difficulty in classifying the various craft, and it should be made penal for a man to take command, and for an owner to put him in charge of a ves**l of ;any class without he had obtained the necessary permission.

The ground upon which the owner and master of the ketch were connoted was, they ueglected to carry lights, and we suppose that there is no one among us wtio will qestion the proprietary of the decision, ft must, however, be remembered that, while in the case of these men the law has been vindicated, there are numberless instances in which it is systematically broken ; in fact, as appeared by the evidence, vessels of the ske of the Enterprise are never known to carry proper lights. Unless immediate attention is paid to the suggestion of the Justices that tiie G-overn* ment should provide proper supervision, in order to compel compliance with the law, a very great blame will attach to those in power. Even, as the case now stands, the usige of the colony must be regarded as mitigating, in a wry great measure, the oifcsnce for which these men have been punished.