Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE PENGUIN DISASTER.

CAPTAIN NAYLOR’S APPEAL. Per Press Association Wellington, May 3. The appeal of Captain Naylor against the decision of the Nautical Court which inquired into the wreck of the steamer Penguin was heard in the Supreme Court this afternoon, before His Honor Mr Justice Cooper and Captains Grey and Lake (assessors). Mr A. L. Herdman appeared for the appellant, Mr Myers for the Marine Department, and Mr P. Levi for the Union Company. It will be remembered that the Court in its judgment suspended Captain ."Naylor’s certificate for a period of twelve months. The grounds of the appeal wore:—(1) That it was not proved that the casualty was due to, or contributed to, by the negligence or wrongful act or default of the said Francis Edwin Naylor; (3) that it was not proved that under existing weather conditions any time after 9 p.m. on Friday, 13th February, 1909, [shelter should have been sought ;or the vessel’s head put out to sea, instead of her course being to Wellington; (3) that it was not proved that the said Francis. Edwin Naylor, under existing circumstances, was guilty of a breach of article 16 of the “Articles for, Preventing Collisions at Sea”; (4) That it was not proved that under the circumstances shown by the evidence the said Francis Edwin Naylor should ghave taken soundings; (5) That there was no evidence to indicate where the vessel struck and in particular there was no evidence to indicate that tbe Penguin did not strike an uncharted rook or submerged wreck; (6) That, generally, there was no evidence to warrant the Court suspending or interfering in any way with the master’s certificate. At the outset it was arranged that the whole of the evidence taken before the Nautical Court should bo read to the Court. After that, Mr Herdman would be given right to call fresh evidence and address the Bench. The Crown would call rebutting evidence if it desired, and counsel could then address the Court, Mr Herdman having the right to reply. > Mr D. G. A. Cooper' (Registrar of the Court) then read the evidence, after which Oapt. F. L. Yiokerman, master of the steamer Kennedy, called by Mr Herdman, said he had often seen wreckage floating in |fche«Stralts, and -if the Penguim had come into contact with' such and struck a good sized spar it might have caused sufficient damage to cause her to founder. The hearing will be continued tomorrow.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/RAMA19090504.2.41

Bibliographic details

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXIV, Issue 9435, 4 May 1909, Page 5

Word Count
410

THE PENGUIN DISASTER. Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXIV, Issue 9435, 4 May 1909, Page 5

THE PENGUIN DISASTER. Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXIV, Issue 9435, 4 May 1909, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert