TAHITI INQUIRY GOES ON

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1075, 12 September 1930, Page 1

TAHITI INQUIRY GOES ON

SECOND-ENGINEER’S STORY HOW BULKHEAD DOOR WAS SHUT Press Association WELLINGTON, Today. THE inquiry into the loss of the Tahiti was continued before the Marine Court in Wellington this morning. Further evidence was heard from the second-engineer, Mr. Archibald Thomson and he answered a good deal of cross-examination from members of the Court and from the representatives of the interests concerned in the inquiry.

The Court consisted ot Mr. E. Page, j S.M., Captain L. C. H. AVorrall, nautical assessor, Mr. W. Parker, engineer assessor, and Mr. G. Huntley, naval architect. Mr. .1. Prendeville appeared for the Marine Department, Mr. C. G. White for the Union Steam Ship Company, Mr. E. K. Kirkcaldie, with him Mr. E. Parry, for the master and deck officers of the Tahiti, and Mr. E. P. Hay for the engineers of the Tahiti. Mr. Archibald Thomson, second engineer, continued his evidence. To Mr. Prendeville he said he had no previous experience of a broken shaft. To Mr. Hay he said the chief-engin-eer, not the master, took charge in the engine-room. The master provided everything that was required. While in the tunnel when he rushed into it he did not. contemplate closing the intermediate door. It was humanly impossible to close it owing to the amount of water flowing in. It would have meant exerting his own personal strength against the water. The flow of water was indicated by the fact, that when he got back to the main bulkhead it had overtaken him. After the bulkhead door was closed by the gear, he gave it a few knocks with a hammer to ensure that it was } closed. The door was kept open for the reason that the bearings of the shafting in the tunnel had to be inspected every half-hour. The door was tested every Sunday under normal conditions and on the Sunday before they arrived at Wellington the door was closed and opened. It appeared to be in perfect. working order, and there was no indication of any apertures at the sides. To Mr. White, witness said engineers and greasers went along the tunnel every half-hour in the ordinary course of their work. SKIN WAS PUNCTURED To Captain Worrall, he said that the fact that the water, when he first saw it, was shooting across from the starboard to the port side, showed that the vessel’s skin was punctured on the starboard side. That was what he reported. Captain Worrall put a number of

questions relating to the quick sinking of the ship after it was abandoned, and pressed witness whether the doors were shut. Witness was positive the doors were shut. To Mr. Parker he said the shaft was last inspected on June 6. The gland had never run hot to witness’s knowledge. By the time the bulkhead door was closed he thought the water was above the plates at the after end of the engine room. To Mr. Huntley he said that if there was only a rent in the side of the ship at the stern that would not account for the water coming into the ship after the. bulkhead door was closed. There must have been rents into numbers three or tour holds. Six months ago he had the bulkhead door chipped and painted, and it was in good order then. ' To Mr. Kirkcaldie witness agreed that the dancing of the broken shaft, being sufficient to shake the boilers, might also be sufficient to damage or crack the bulkhead. There was only a shaft clearance through the bulkhead, no gland or bearing. To Mr. Page he said it was his opinion that the bulkhead was injured by the mishap as he had said. Six months earlier he had it chipped and painted, and personally had seen that it was in good order and condition. (Continued on Page 10.)