INQUIRY INTO THE COLLISION BETWEEN THE TUI AND NAPIER.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 5052, 2 June 1877, Page 3

INQUIRY INTO THE COLLISION BETWEEN THE TUI AND NAPIER.

(Before J. C. Crawford, Esq., R.M., and Captain Johnson, Nautical Assessor.) The adjourned sitting of the Court of Inquiry into the alleged misconduct of Captain Bonner of the s.s. Tui, in connection with the collision between that steamer and the Napier, took place at the Resident Magistrate’s Court House yesterday afternoon at two o’clock, Mr. Stafford appeared on behalf of the Customs; Mr. Barton for the defendant. The exact nature of the case (the first of the kind which has occurred in Wellington) was explained by Mr. Stafford, who also quoted law authorities as to the power of the Court to deal with such cases by cancelling the certificate.

A discussion arose as to whether Mr. Barton should be permitted to put in a letter from Mr. William Smith, a passenger on the voyage to Kaikoura, the charges in connection with which trip had been withdrawn by Mr. Stafford. The Court decided against Mr. Barton, on the ground that the letter had reference to a matter outside of the present case.

Thomas Holmes was the first witness called, and he deposed : I am a master mariner. Left Wellington for Foxton in the s.s. Napier on Saturday, tho sth of May, at about 11.45 p.m. The weather was cloudy, but not dark. Saw a steamer coming in about half-past twelve. She steamed very close, going round our stern. That was the Tui. Sometime afterwards, about two miles outside the Heads, sho steamed round us again. There was no necessity for the captain doing this. I kept away a little when he carao upon the starboard side, so that the boats might not he too close. Wo reached tho Manawatu bar on Sunday at about 1.30 p.m. I saw the Tui then, She was just taking the bar as I got up. The signal then was, “Wait for tide.” The Tui stuck on tho bar for some considerable time. She got off, and then steamed towards us. When the signal was given wo took the bar. • We got into the river a very short time before tho Tui. We steamed up tho river in the ordinary course. Tho Tui gradually gained on us, and in about a mile and a quarter almost touched us on the starboard port. She had extra steam on, and was evidently endeavoring to overtake ns, This was the narrowest part

of the river, about a mile and half from the bar. There is a bend in the river at the point lam describing. The Tui gradually gained on the Napier there. I put my helm hard a-star-board in order to avoid a collision. The Tui coming on an angle, pushed on our port, and ran us into the north bank. The Napier was steaming the proper course, about mid-channel, keeping as close as possible to the south bank. No accident has ever happened to me, and I have been going that course since August last. On the north side of the channel there is a mud Hat. Ido not think there is sufficient room forone vessel to pass anotheratthatparticular bend. On the day in question the river was low. I do not consider, from my knowledge of the size of the two vessels and the size of the river, that there was room for two vessels. The Tui ran into us as we touched the bank, smashing two boats, carrying away the davits, breaking away the corner of the deckhouse, and doing other damage. The , Tui then stopped, but Captain Bonner made no remark. I caused a survey to be made by Mr. Gibson and Mr. Johnston, who reside at Foxton. Cross-examined by Mr. Barton : The Napier is a good deal slower than the Tui. It is not a fact that the boat which gets in first gets cargo, and that which goes away first gets the passengers. The boat which first arrives at the wharf has the privilege of discharging first. The Tui and Napier are opposition boats. I consider it dangerous to cross the bar when the signal “wait for tide” is up. I never, to my recollection, crossed the bar when that signal was up. In many places it is customary for the signalman to give a private signal to vessels of light draught, that they could enter whilst larger vessels remained outside. The night in question was calm ; X do not consider that it was safe to cross the bar. Ido not want Captain Bonner to lose his certificate. I have never said outside the court that should his certificate be cancelled it would be to my benefit; neither have I that I would sooner have any other man commanding the opposition boat. The tide served that day at about a quarter past 3 o’clock. When I saw the Tui first try to take the bar our steamer was about two miles distant. We entered first. I will swear certainly that I did not receive a private signal on that occasion. I was not waiting after we got into the channel, in order to get up the collision. The Tui was a quarter of a mile behind us. It was about two and a-half miles from the bar to the point at which the collision took place. Mr. Barton cross-examined the witness at length with the view of upsetting his evidence that there was not room for the two vessels to pass where the collision took place. By the Court: After I trimmed the Napier she was drawing about 6ft. of water. It was about half-past nine o’clock when I crossed the bar. The usual code of signals is used. When we first arrived opposite the bar the signal indicated wait for tide, and before we took the bar the signal indicated that we should do so.

At the conclusion of Captain Bonner’s evidence the Court adjourned till this morning at 11 o’clock.