WRECK INQUIRY.

Patea Mail, 28 April 1882, Page 3

WRECK INQUIRY.

VERDICT OF THE COURT.

The magisterial inquiry into tiie stranding and wreck of the Patea steamer, near the mouth of the Patea river, was resumed yesterday in the Court House, before his Worship the Mayor and H. S. Peacock, J. P.’s, with Captain Leys as nautical assessor.

Mr. Lundon, Collector of Customs, conducted the case on behalf of the Marine Department. Mr, Barton, solicitor, appeared for the captain ; and Mr, Hamerton, solicitor, watched the case on behalf of the harbor master. The inquiry occupied the whole of three days, and concluded at a late hour last evening, THIRD DAY. THE PILOT’S EVIDENCE. Alfred Wood, pilot and harbor master, handed in his warrant signed by Governor Bowen, and said : About a quarter past one on the 11th instant, I gave the signals for the Patea steamer to take the bar. Shortly after she kept away, being then about 1| miles southward of the bar; and kept on that course until the beacon was a little open to the south. I signalled to keep to the south, which appeared not to be obeyed, as she kept on her former course until the back leading beacon and the seaward beacon (on the west spit) were.about in one. She stood in-on that course, until when in the break she hauled up to the south, with north side on to the sea ; continuing a short time. She kept away again, still having the leading beacons open to the north. I wanted her to go to the north-north-east, leaving the beacons open a little to the southward ; but instead of that, her course would be north-east, broadside on to the sea. She kept on that course, with the beacon open to the north, and I signalled for her to keep more east, to get the beacons inline. She did not seem to haul up any, and kept in on that course until she stuck on the west spit. 1 then ran to the breakwater, and asked the captain to go astern. He said he was going astern full speed with both engines. She soon got oif into deep water. He then reversed the engines to try and get up the stream. I could not say whether the starboard engine was going easier than the port, but she stuck again on the west spit hard and fast, about the same place she had come off. I said to the captain, “ It would be better to lower a boat and run a line to the breakwater.” That was done, and the line was fastend to the end of the groin. The end on the steamer was passed forward to the steam winch on the starboard quarter ; and they heaved at the line while both engines were also going astern. I was ready to shift the line on the breakwater, if required, thinking that the captain would order to pass a messenger from for’ad to bend on the line aft, if required ; that should the steamer get off in deep water, the line aft could be slacked out and hauled in for’ad, to cant her bow towards the breakwater. This not being done, I shouted to keep going astern, thinking the captain and myself were acting in concord to get the steamer out of danger. While she was going astern she was canting with her bow to the nor’westward, getting at the same time clear to seaward of the breakwater, I sung out, “You had better go to sea again,” because I saw the vessel was canting to seaward instead of the bow facing up stream. I sung out “Go full speed ahead with the starboard engine and astern with the port engine.” The line was then taut, helping to cant her head to seaward ; and she was then well to the east side of the channel, where there is a basin outside the end of the breakwater, about 40 fathoms. Seeing her canted sufficient, I sung out to set the mainsail and slack away the line. The engine, I presumed, was going to cant her, as she was canting all the time to go outward. Her bow being sufficiently canted, in my opinion, I sang out, “Go ahead with both engines and let go the line.” The line was let go from the vessel, and she seemed to go ahead seaward all right, in the proper channel course ; but after a while she drifted to the westward, and kept going so until she grounded under the west head. I next hauled down the signals, and as soon as I could get a boat I crossed the river and went to the steamer.

Mr Lundon : Had she the beacons in line at any time ?

Witness : No. Then the ship was never in the channel ? Witness,: No, she was to the westward of it. I signalled with a white flag to keep to the south. The Mayor : As to the local signals, the Court has already got it in evidence that the signals were understood. Mr Lundon : After getting off the spit the first time, did she go ahead again ? Witness : Yes, and then stuck fast. When she first stuck, she was about 120 feet from the breakwater.

Was there any fresh in the river ? Witness : A slight fresh, but not strong enough to prevent the steamer from coming closer to the groin. What was the steamer’s draught that day ? Witness : I did not signal for her draught, but she is rarefy more than sft Gin at neaps, and I thought she would be sft 2in or 4in on that day. What was the depth along the breakwater ? Witness : About 15 ft. at that time, and about 50 ft. in width, beyond which the channel shoals. What distance did the steamer stick from the breakwater ?

Witness : 120 to 130 feet from the apron of the wall to the place where she stuck the first and second time.

What was the depth on the bar ? Witness : The depth on the bar in channel when I hoisted the signals was about 6ft 9in.

How do you ascertain that? Witness : By my guage stick and my daily observation of marks and posts. Have those marks ever deceived you ? Witness : No. Is it the practice with masters to keep the beacons open in entering the river ? Witness ; With a south-east wind, it would be practicable to keep the beacons open to the south, to allow for leeway and set. The captain could have kept the beacons in line on that day, as near as the sea would allow ; as I have had no trouble with the former master.

Was there too much sea on that day to prevent him from keeping the beacons in line ? Witness : No. Have you seen the beacons kept in line in a heavier sea and wind ?

Witness : Yes, but they sheer as much to one side as to other when out of the lino.

Was it all on one side on that day, much or little ? Witness : Rather too much on one side for that state of tide on that day. To what do you attribute the sticking of the vessel on that day ? Witness : Had the beacons been kept in line, it would have brought the vessel clear of the west spit in mid-channel, into the bight of the groin, all the way right from seaward ; only he would have bumped on the groin if he had not hauled up. I have been pilot at this port 15 years, and was here two years before that as coxswain of the imperial surfboat.

Cross-examined by Mr Barton : The steamer passed the end of the break-water at a distance of 60 or 70 feet. The channel shoals to the west spit after that ; and it would be impossible for the steamer to have touched at the bottom 70 feet from the end of the wall in a straight line at the time she entered. IE she touched, she must have been more than 70 feet from the end of the wall. If she was 120 feet away she would touch. What is the effect on a steamer’s course with a fresh running out? Witness : The effect of a slight fresh would be nothing. A fresh might cant her a little, if she were not watched ; but being a twin screw, she could be worked accordingly. The channel over the bar is abot 200 feet wide. The bar in itself is only likeihe crown of a road, the width of the narrowest part being about 200 feet ; but it deepens on either side of the crown. The depth across the 200 feet would be 6ft 9in at that time. The steamer was 150 to 200 feet out of the line when she crossed the bar and hauled up opposite the wall-end. She was 1£ points out. By the Court; Three of the men were not on board the steamer when I gave the order to go to sea. They had taken the line in a boat. From the lowering of the boat to getting off the spit would be about 20 minutes. I thought at the time she stuck that a line should have been got out from forward, to haul her into the river.

In your position as harbor master, did you consider it your duty to give orders ? Witness : I did not consider it my duty, but I tried to give assistance and make suggestions. I consider that I had a joint responsibility with the captain in endeavoring to get the vessel off, until such time as she would be handed over to the insurers. In giving a direction, I thought I was acting in conjunction with the captain to do the best we could. EVIDENCE OF SEAMEN. Two witnesses were called, on behalf of the captain, and examined by MiBarton.

James Briggs said he and another were at the wheel steering. Had steered the steamer over the bar every time it crossed since Christmas. Could not see the beacons from the wheel: directions are taken from the captain’s hands on the bridge. The bow was always on the sheer in coming in. He added : We passed the breakwater-end 30 or 40 feet off, when the vessel took a sheer on top of a sea, and the vessel would not answer her helm, because of a little wind and a fresh in the river. I ported the helm hard a port, as directed. 1 heard Let go,” to put her astern again, and directly she struck.

William Brown said he helped to work the wheel, and the bit of fresh in the river canted the steamer.

ARGUMENTS-

The evidence being concluded, there was a lively contention between Mr. Barton and Mr. Lundon, as to which should address the Court first. Each wanted the other to speak first. The Mayor: It might be graceful for the professional advocate to give way, and address the Court first. Mr Barton : It might be graceful, but exceedingly indiscreet. The Mayor : I am ‘ advised by my brother magistrate to leave you both alone. The Court then conferred, and called on Mr Lundon to speak first. Mr London then argued that the stranding was caused by the beacons not being kept in line; and by not obeying the pilot’s signals to keep nearer to the breakwater. The pilot abrogated his functions after the stranding, by not acting on his own judgment to save the ship ; and he must take the onus of what happened in

consequence of taking any other advice. The steamer was lost, shamefully lost, through the action of the master and of the pilot. Mr Barton then argued from the evidence that either the pilot gave the signals to enter before the tide had risen high enough, or the pilot did not keep the beacons in line. He contended that the fault lay with the captain in giving the signals too early on the tide.

VERDICT AND CENSURE. The Court having adjourned till 8 p.m. to consider the evidence, covering some 80 sheets of foolscap paper, the decision was delivered at that hour, the room being crowded.

The Mayor said the Court must first express strong disapproval of the manner in which the mate gave evidence ; especially his replies to questions on nautical points. While censuring him in that respect, the Court did not blame him in any degree for the loss of the steamer. The Mayor continued : The Court has endeavored throughout this inquiry to sift the evidence in such a manner as to be able to arrive at a just decision as to the cause of the loss of the steamship Patea, and the endangering of life and property. After a very protracted sitting and exhaustive inquiry, the Court are able now to arrive at a decision. We find that the steamship Patea was stranded on the west head of the Patea river on the 11th instant, and subsequently became a wreck. In connection with this, we find that the master is to blame, on the following grounds. First, for not obeying the signals repeatedly made to him to keep more to the eastward, thereby causing the uessel to ground on the west spit. Second, for not sounding when crossing the bar, nor having an}’’ other means of ascertaining the depth of water. Third, for not having proper means of securing the vessel after grounding, when the current was running out ; and not using any precautions for preventing the vessel from drifting outside. Fourth, for not having used seamanlike care, inasmuch as he abandoned the vessel to the order of the harbor master, after she grounded. The master is guilty of want of care and seamanship. The captain’s certificate is therefore suspended for three months ; and the Court recommend that he be granted a certificate as first mate. We further find that no blame is attached to the chief officer or engineer in respect to the loss of the vessel.

Captain Leys added : I concur, as assessor, in the decision the Bench has arrived at, on the evidence that the vessel was not in the channel in crossing the bar. Mr Peacock : I am of the same opinion as my colleague in the chair. The Mayor then called Mr Wood and said : With regard to the harbor master, the Court taking all the circumstances into consideration—that the tides were neap, that a freshet was running down the river, that a south-east wind was blowing—are of opinion that the signal to take the bar was given too early on the tide ; that in the matter of getting a line from the starboard quarter to the breakwater, after the vessel stranded, without any means to prevent the vessel drifting seaward, is deserving of the gravest censure of the Court. The Court not having the power can deal no further with the harbor master. The Court returns his certificate.

COSTS AND OBJECTIONS. Mr Lundon : As to costs, I think they go.with the judgment. Mr Barton : Before you deal with costs, I want to raise a question of jurisdiction. Section 244 of the Shipping Act says that no certificate of any officer shall be suspended or cancelled unless the conditions mentioned in section 240 are first complied with.

Mayor: This is a misapprehension. The preliminary inquiry did take place on the steamer.

Mr Barton : But a copy of the reportshould have been furnished.

Mayor : It is rather late to raise that point, because the Court is quite satisfied that the requirements have been complied with.

Mr Lundon : A copy of the charge has been furnished to the captain. That complies with the Act. Mayor : A copy of the report sent to the Minister of Marine has been furnished to the officers.

Mayor: As to costs, the Court has carefully considered the matter, and under the circumstances has decided that no order for costs will be made. The effect is that the master has not to pay the costs of the inquiry, but has to pay his own witnesses and his advocate.