SURAT ENQUIRY.

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume IV, Issue 255, 23 January 1874, Page 3

SURAT ENQUIRY.

The enquiry into the wreck of" the fine emigrant ship Surat was closed on Saturday last. Mr. Stout) who. watched "the case for the captain; and generally'" lor the officers, and .Mr. Haggitt, the Crown Solicitor, addressed the-Court- briefly'on the evidence : . , . • Mr. Haggibt thought he would only he wasting time by attempting to reconcile the trivial discrepancies in the testimony of the witness. He would also reserve auything'he might have to'say on the legal points of the case, until Mr. Stout had -addressed the "Bench. , .

Mr. Stout, in addressing the Bench, urged that there was not a particle of evidence to show that even if the steamer had' been signalled, the vessel could have been saved. Another strange feature to be noticed in the evidence was that there had not been a single sailor called who was in the mate's watch, A that is, who was on deck from twelve till '.four o'clock on tH|' night .of the accident. /Phis should havp liefcn done if it. was true, as had been stated,-.that the captain was unfit to take care of the' vessel up' to four o'clock. That this hMd. not been- done was also unfair to the first mate. If the -Bench had any power in the matter, it was under . clause 239, and, unless-it could be' shown that the act charged had taken place while the mate was in command, no wrongful act or default could bg computed to hiru... 'Theonly legal would mak'e was,as to the powp.r oE the Cow-t, or its jurisdiction, as it was called. There was no act'oh the part of the first or second mate that had caused -the loss of the ship. Even if the first mate had been intoxicated at a certain hour in the morning, that did not cause, the loss of the ship. And what was the evidence as regards the second mate ?' He would ask the Crown' ' Solicitor to point out any single act that the second mate did which was wrong. (LJr. Hagg'tft: rle got drunk") The whole of the doctor's case was that the captain did not beach the vesiel soon enough,"and did notsignal the steamer to get the passengers- off the ship. He therefore contended that the evidence disclosed no wrongful apt..or default - which gave the Court,power in,the matter. The only ai ate'ments served on the .captain' •were'given online day after 'the formal' investigation had been commenced;.-therefore, .he" contended that .section 9 had not been , complied with, inasmuch as no copy of the report upon which the summonses T^era.issued had been served on the captain or his officers, and, this being the case, under sec-tion-15 the Court had no power in the mat--, ter. Coming to the evidence, he noticed onepeculiarity, namely, that only a certain class of witnesses had been examined. ."He had noticed-another strange feature-in the-evi- ', dence, which was this: if the .Bench were to take the statements of the witnesses.as cor-, rect in every particular, they would have to believe that every witness examined had -done most tobeachth'eship. Booth'thought •he had done the, most, and so also thought the sailmaker, . Jsitt,. and others. . i"f. the Bench believed these statements they "would have to come to the conclusion that each one of the passengers and crew did everything, ■whilst the others did nothing. It did seem a most extraordinary thing,, running through this inquiry, -that.each of the witnesses thought he did everything. He did not wish to impute anything to the witnesses, though they may be a little prejudiced against the .captain. He thought that it .wis perfectly plain that a great deal of excitement had prevailed on board, and it was only ou'this assumption that he could reconcile the state : ments made by the witnesses. Regarding where the ship struck there was very conflicting evidence, and it would be difficult to decide on that point. At the best, -they could only make a guess. After the vessel struck she' was run off land. The pumps •were got in 'readiness, and everything done which was. possible. From twelve to four was left a blank. As to what transpired during v this time none of the witnesses knew anything—not until between four and five, when the steamer was hi sight. He believed that the Bench would agree with him that there was no witness who told a more straightforward story, whether it was in his favor or otherwise, than the capiain. He attempted to palliate nothing, and even when asked if he did not think it wrong to have hove to, he admitted it was an error of judgment. And the first and second officers gave their evidence in a similar manner. The learned counsel then referred to the opinions of the witness as to what were the signs of drunkenness, and pointed out lhal, in his cross-examination of 'the . doctor, the latter , could not point out a single order that the captain had' given which he considered wrong. It had not been proved that there was anything~in the captain's manner but what might have been caused by excitement. He submitted that the test of drunkenness was what he did. It was the opinion of one witness that the captain was drunk, because Kelly, the steward; put the wheel the wrong way; but if they were to believe the statements of some of the witnesses, the sailmaker was in charge of the ship when Kelly was at the wheel, and he took no steps to

remove him. He aprealed to the Bench if orders given by the caplaiu previous to "the vessel being beached were not such as would be given by a man who knew what he was about. Referring to the question of hoisting tbo ensign, he pointed out the great discrepancies that existed in the evidence as to the time that elapsed between the ensign, being taken down and rehoi3ted; and asked the

Banch t<» notice the contradiction between the evidence of Mr. Booth and Mr. .lsitt as to the hoistinc; of the ensign. Air. Booth had sworn that he was assisted in doing this by Mr. lsitt; whereas Mr. Isitt swears that ho did not assist in hoisting the ensign the sjcond time. After further alluding to other contradictions in the evidence, he concluded by submitting that ' there was no wrongful act on fh.3 part of the

captain,:, or.-'first or second officer, which: had caused-itheloss uf the ship*; or ; injirry,:in'■'•any', way. •';'.'" Jlv the of; / Customs: wished the captain or any of;the\erew ';'; to; be ; pimishsd'for.drimkeuness,he would'have 'to proceed under*the Merchant Shipping2Act, and have them tried., by'.jury.... That. Coiirt

had n:> power to suspend or cancel certificates, inasmuch as there was do proof of the appointment of a'nautical assessor; and evon had'such appointment being proved, there still'would be no power to cancel or suspend ■the- ccrtiiicates unless some wrongful e'et' had bioh proved. The last legal point he, submitted was that the last sect ion of the Act had not been complied with, because the application of the officer of Customs to the Magistrate to hold the inquiry hud not l-.et.-ri made till after the sun-monsos wjre issued,, and the inquiry commenced; and as MO copy of the report had been served on tlie captain' and officers till after the actual eonimciieernen,t of thQ inquiry he contended "tb.;tfc" i'bX

3w'ii'-ii h ill to pnwei bej'ond inquiring as xo' ihi; wiovk Hi the vebsel Mr ii.i<giit. m replv, siid lie would'coniim. himself .»s> stnctly as lie cuuld to lie po ntt rrsed by Mr. Stout. Ad to the iir»L point, that there was no proof" of the appomimjnt of Captain Thomson as nautical assessor, h.p would reply that there was no more nccjs=>iry for doing this than there was of pro\ mg th it their Woiships were Reoident Magistrate's He considered it would be impudence on his part to call upon Captxm I horns >n to prove that he was nautical jflaes&oi lie might as well call upon the Judge of the Supreme Court to produce his commissi in There was no doubt that the principal Collector of Cu&toms h.id power, under the I Ith section of the Act, to appoint a nautic il assessor, and had no doubt that Captain Tho nson had satisfied their Worships thj,u lie had been'appointed; and as to the point that there was no wrongful act proved upuii which the certificates could be suspended or cancelled, he submitted that section 242 of the M erchant Shipping Act of ISj-1- provided *or the suspension of the certificates of any master or, mate who should be reported to have been guilty of any gross tut -of drunkenness or tyranny. By the Merchant Shipping Act Amendment Act of ISo2, tho power given to the Board, ot Trades under the 242 nd section of the Act, IS'"j4, vas tiiken away, and the power given to the Local Marine Board or Magistrates. So their W'or-hips would see that not only was drunkenness one case for which the Board of Trade might, under section 242, cancel a certificate; but that the same power v. as given to the magistrates investigating the case. As to his learned friend's remarks that drjiikcuness was not a wrongful act/lie

would say that if it caused the'" loss of "the ship it :iiust he so The question of - wrong - In I ace would have to be determined from the whole circumstances' of the case, and theit Worships were the sole judges upon that* point. As to the last'legal 'point, that no statement or report had been handed to the captain previous to the commencement of the inquiry, it had been stated by his learned friend that of the iwo" statements served upon the captain and officers, one bore date sth January, and the other the 6th; but there was no evidence that they had been signed on those days. He contendedthat the formal investigation took place on the 9th, and both" documents had been served some day before* But at all events, even had the statements been served upon the captain any time previous to his ;giving his evidence, it would have been sufficient. ' Mr. Stoivc then replied to the arguments, put forward by Mr. Haggitt. - " After the Bench had spent a few moments in consultation, Mr. jStrode said that the Bench considered it llecessary "to adjourn the cas.e until Tuesday." They would have been prepared to have given their opinion on Monday, but Mr. Pulton had business afc the Taieri on that day. On Tuesday at 4 pm. they would make known their decision. The inquiry was accordingly adjourned until Tuesday.'