LOSS OF THE TAINUI.

Taranaki Daily News, 1 November 1919, Page 8

LOSS OF THE TAINUI.

JINDING OP THE COURT, 1 AS UNSUITABLE CARGO. Telegraph.—Presi Association. Christ church, Last Night. The judgment of the Nautical Court Which enquired into the loss ot the steamer Tainui, on September 16th, When on a voyage from Lyttelton to tVanganui<with a cargo of benzine, was delivered to-day. The Court found:— (a) That the regulations regarding the shipment and carriage at sea of petroleum were not complied with, i (b) That due care was not exercised - In the storage of the petroleum on the taid ship. (c) That the said ship was not safe fnd suitable for the reception and conveyance of petroleum. (d) Tins and cases containing petroleum were leaking to such an extent '/ aa to Tender it unsafe for the vessel to put to sea. ' (e) -That all life saving appliances, . with the exception of a lifeboat, were efficient, and the available lifeboat was ivailable, but was too light in con- ■ itruction and had insufficient floor space. The New Zealand Refrigerating Company, the owners of the vessel, were erdered to pay the costs of the inquiry ' Mounting to £461 18s 7d. THE CARGO CRITICISED. ADMIRALTY REGULATIONS DEFIED. . CARRIAGE OF BENZINE. ' Christchurch, Last Night. In an annexe to its finding regarding the. loss of the Tainni, the Nautical Court reviews ''the evidence relating to the nature and storage of the cargo, - tnd says the stowage was negligent on two grounds.' None of the leaking cases should tare been allowed ship, and ■ ploughs should not have been placed in .the same hold with :and on tdp of benzine cargo. It was unreasonable to expect , any officer to so stow his ship of his ;Vown volition. . The company's shipping official inew of the leaking state of f the cargo, and the only interference was that of the captain and the mate, who » • were acting under orders, if not as to ht 'the manner of stowage, at least as to .the necessity of getting the cargo away ; Any other hypothethis, the finding adds', would mean that voluntarily each offieer let out on this last fateful voyage with = almost certain' death facing the crew and themselves. Referring to the trouble with the i crew in March last, which resulted in their dismissal and the subsequent dismissal of Captain Williamson, and the 7" fact that counsel for the Refrigerating , Company,, in cross-examination, asked no questions as to his dismissal, the Court , drew the' inference that he was dismissed . . .because he supported the crew in their "/refusal to go to sea in an unseaworthy ' - ahip with a dangerous cargo. In connection with breaches by three '' of its captains of the daylight sailing regulations, the Court , .says the owner!: at one time verbally reprimanded one captain for disobedience' in not carrying oat their instructions. After this reprimand several night journeys were made , across the Strait under orders, written and verbal, from the Wellington agents, bat, though these journeys were known to the owners, it was not suggested that the offending manager, agents, and captain had ibeen in any way dealt with. 1 Jt therefore appeared that the "instruc tions to carry put the intention of the Admiralty' were not intended to be obeyed. In regard to the explosion, the Court was of opinion that when the fireman of the watch started to pull out his fires gas fumes in the stokehold ignited _ - and caused an explosion in the forehold. The attempt to launch the lifeboat after /the accident was a bad practice. It was not suggested that the belts and buoys were ineffective. In the result it transpired that it would have been better if none \had left the ship. If all had remained on board they would, in all %uman probability, have been saved. The • 'lifeboat v.-is too light in construction, . *nd had insufficient floor space. The evidence contradicted the log, whieh said that lifeboat drill was regularly held monthly. - , After answering the issues, the Court remarked on the contradiction between {regulations 2 and 6 of the petroleum, , jegulations, and suggested that petroleum , should be carried at sea only in vessels containing iron or Eteel bulkheads. Suggestions were also made as to lifeboats * ind lifeboat drill, and frequent inspection of life-saving apparatus was recom- . - (bended.. The Court also expressed the opinion that the Lyttelton staff of the Marine Department was insufficient to : cope with its work. £fter the judgment had been delivered, the Coroner, Mr. S. IS McCarthy, re- - turned the following verdict in reference to the inquest on the bodies foutad: That Charles Williams, Epram Greenwood, William Townsend, Daniel McLean, and Alexander Fullen met their ' death by drowning on September IG, 1919, between the hours of 2.30 and fl ajn., through being compelled, on account of an explosion of benzine gas, to leave the Tainui, on which they were serving, whilst the said ship was at sea, about four miles off the coastline, near Gore * Btf. >