WHAT DID SHE STRIKE?

Taranaki Daily News, 29 March 1920, Page 5

WHAT DID SHE STRIKE?

BADEN POWELL'S ACCIDENT. THE NAUTICAL INQUIHY. A nautical inquiry was held at Welling ton on Friday into the circumstances of the accident to the coastal steamer [Baden Powell, which struck and bumped thrci! times on some hard substaaca whilst making a passage from Wellington to New Plymouth on the morning of February 19th last. The log showed that the vessel lift Wellington at 11.20 p.m. on FFebruafy 17th. At 3 p.m. on February ltth land was observed in the direction of Mount Kgruont, and the weather was still thick. At l.io a.m. on IWifnary 10th tile ship touched some obstacle, hung a few moments, then- gathefcd speed, bumped again twice, and, *jjfp lominenced to make water, Ta* appT eat ran of the pumps kept the flow dwftl, and the ship arrived at New PJjmotttk at 12:20 p.m. on February IMb. H. P. 8. Olson, who, was mftrter of: the Baden Powell on the trip whin ttla accident occurred, said he was relief on the bridge by the made at 4 winon February 18th. During this watoh the mate reported that he had wen laid in the vicinity of Cape Egmont aid! had accordingly altered the vessel's 1 course half a point. Owing to a chatfce in the wind to the westward witMß* altered the course half appoint to coifctaract the influence. At 1.10 a.m. on the 19th witness noticed a dark object On the starboard bow and the helm was put hard a-starboard- After twaHgi two slight bumps were noticeable, bati on sounding he got "no bottom." lW mate reported that the vessel was mating a little more water than usual, a*4 she continued to do so until New Pfr« mouth was reached. On examination OH the "hard" marks were found as if fka vessel had scraped some hard substanse. Witness stated that he was unacquainted with the Taranaki coast as it was his first trig. In addressing the court, Mr. Xirfcj caldia (for the master and the first officer) said that what had to be determined was_whether the master was guilty of committing a wrongful «ct, or an error of judgment. He submitted: tnat the master was not jruilty of,' neglect or of taking a risk intentionally, out bad apparently committed an error or judgment. The evidence did not snow that the vessel went ashore, and wlat probably happened was that she atttok some snag common in these water* The Court found that ther ewaff no negligence on the part of tho mastef or officers and returned their certificates, the cost of the inquiry to be born* bv the Marine Department.