THE ENVY INQUIRY.

Auckland Star, Volume XXX, Issue 278, 23 November 1899, Page 2

THE ENVY INQUIRY.

DECISION OF THE COURT

THE VESSEL SEAWORTHY

CAPTAIN'S

CERTIFICATE

RETURNED.

The inquiry into the allegations made as to the seaworthiness of the | ketch Envy was concluded after we j went to press yesterday. j The evidence of Joseph Keld, formerly mate of the vessel, and Isaac G. Christian and Malcolm E. Champion, late seamen in the Envy, taken on oath at the preliminary inquiry on August 25th, was put in and read, these witnesses having left the Envy. Their statements corroborated that of the captain, and. expressed full confidence in him. Mathias H. Anderson, A.B. on the Envy, stated that he had been in the vessel since May last, and considered ■her seaworthy. The houses on deck were solid and substantial. The Envy must have been thoroughly seaworthy or she would not have ridden the storm. This concluded the. evidence. Mr Theo Cooper, w_o appeared for Captain Champion, said the inquiry appeared to him a most extraordinary one. The vessel had encountered a very severe gale, and had come through it practically without damage. Yet her captain had been detained in Auckland at great personal cost to answer a charge that had never been brought against him, but which arose from senseless rumours which had acquired some significance through having been repeated in the House. Had the Envy gone down during the gale, the aspersion would have been thrown on her captain, her owner, and the Department, that she was not in a fit state to leave the port, a suggestion that would, in the. face, of the evidence, have been most unfair to the excellent seaman who commanded her, and to the vessel. Mr Alex. Rose, Collector of Customs, stated that he had been called upon to make the application for an inquiry under singular circumstances. He had held a preliminary inquiry, when the evidence given proved mbse conclusively that the vessel was thoroughly seaworthy, and then had been subsequently notified to proceed with a magiisteriaJ inquiry on the vessel's return to Auckland. This course had been taken owing to the statements made as to her tmseaworthiness. He hardly knew what charges to make, and could not, under the circumstances, ask for costs, as the charges had been pressed by outside influences. Mr Brabant stated that the decision of the Court would be given in writing at ten next morning. The report for the Minister of Marine, prepared by Mr Brabant, detailed the damage received by the Envy, and stated that the captain's conduct, was praiseworthy and seamanlike, and that he was in uo way responsible, for the damage. He was asked by the Collector of "Customs to inquire whether the Envy was sea<worthy when she left Wellington, and whether her deck houses were safe and substantially built, and whether the master was to blame for the state in which his vessel left Wellington. The evidence showed that on the voyage from Sydney to Wellington the Envy had a rough time, her starboard bulwarks being damaged by a sea. The damage was temporarily'repaired by the master, but so strongly that the sea. which, broke ou.board.on 14th August broke the starboard bulwarks, but not that portion repaired by the master. The master could not be blamed far leaving the permanent repairs until he reached Auckland. There was no evidence to show that the" Envy left Wellington in an unseaworthy state, or that the deckhouses were unsafe. On the contrary the evidence of Captain Clayton, Lloyd's surveyor, together with, the fact that the vessel was for over seven days exposed to an exceptionally heavy gale, and suffered so little damage, proved that she was seaworthy, and that her deckhouses were secure and safe. . He came to the conclusion that no blame ■whatever was attachable to the master of the Envy, and his certificate was accordingly returned. The nautical assessors, Captains Adamson and Fernandez, concurred in the decision.