THE WARATAH

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10173, 24 February 1911, Page 5

THE WARATAH

CABLE NEWS

United Press A s'sociation — By Elec trie Telegraph — Copyright.

FINDING OF THE COURT

THE VESSEL WAS SEAWORTHY

(Received February 23, 8. a.m.) LONDON, February 22. t The Board of Trade Court of Enquiry's judgment with regard to the loss of the Lund liner Waxatah states that the vessel was properly equipped and manned, and the cargo properly stowed. There was sufficient stability, and the steamer was seaworthy. She was lost during a storm; probably she capsized. However, the chain of circumstances remains undetermined. The court is unable to understand the maintenance of silence concerning the stability and behaviour at sea of the Waratah when on her maiden voyage. This silence almost compels an inference unfavourable to the owners of the vessel.

CONFLICTING EVIDENCE

CAPSIZED IN A GALE. I

SOME SUGGESTIONS

(Received Last Night, ■ lu~o'clock.) LONDON, February 23. The Wairatah judgment shows that there was only conflicting and indirect evidence to go upon, but owing to the absence of wreckage, the ' Court was of the opinion that she capsized in.a gale of exceptional violence, in, the first great storm she encountered. The Court' dismissed' the theory that the loss was due to .an explosion in the bunker coal. The Waratah was properly supplied with boats and life-saving appliances. The crew were considerably in excess of the Board of Trade's requirements. It was thought that an early opportunity might be taken to consider whether the requirements were suffi-i •dent for a large passenger ship. The Court suggested that a, com- " milttce of experts should be., appointed to decide the minimum -stability requirements of different types of vessels, including stability and' curves. Rules for the stowage 'of cargo should be framed by the builders for the guidance of ship-own-ers. . /'•"•' • .-'■ "',;''' I

Discussing Mr F. Lund's \ assurance that Captain, Ilbery did not report regarding the. Waratah's maiden voyage, to understand Captain lltyery's silence concerning the stability of the vessel. It was contrary to the whole practice of ship-owners and shipmasters to treat the matter with the indifference with which ■ Mr Lund .and' Captain, Ilbery treated it in connection with the Waratah. Continued interference was and the owners were greatly strengthened, by correspondence with the builders. Apparently, a difficulty arose during *the mitial loading.' The presumption. was that the Waratah was a tender ship when she started ;on fei' mai-' :den voyage. , The Court considered .that neither the interview by F. Lund nor Pecks (the builders) ou April 23rd was complete. It added: "We can only leave the: matter •'there." '■.'•»'.' . ■ : ,'■"'-

The report sharply commented on Mr Lund's use of the word "bluff" regarding his letters to the builders. The evidence showed that' the difficulty was not surmounted on. the outward and homeward journeys, but tenderness' in the upright not necessarily .involved instability at the large angles of the heel. The explan" ation of the large amount of adverse comment lay in. the undoubted tenderness during the first voyage, and 'whilst loading the vessel was in such a condition that quite observable lists could be produced by moderate wind pressures, relatively small alterations in the, water ballast, the" consumption of fresh water, and the non-symmetricai < working oiit/of the coal. The Court regarded the; contradictory statements regarding the' rolling as fairly accurate evidence of truthful people about phenomena which they did not tinder stand. The Court discredited the story of the steamer Tottenham of the reported discovery of bodies.