Untitled

Auckland Star, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 132, 4 June 1907, Page 5

To Mr. Kettle: He did not see any green light when he went below at 11.30 o"clock. There was nothing to prevent anyone seeing a green light if it had | been there. Hodge, told witness he did not notice any lights until the vessel was on top of them. This concluded the evidence, and after counsel had addressed the court his Worship announced that the Court would endeavour to give its decision this morning. THE COURT'S FINDING. BOTH VESSELS TO BLAME. In giving the Court's decision this morning, Mr. Kettle said the Vesper was on a starboard tack and the Manurewa was on a port tack. Both were close hauled. The wind was light and sea calm, and other atmospheric conditions favourable. In the opinion of the Court the collision was primarily due to neglect on the part of both vessels in not keeping a proper Icok-out. Authorities showed that a man employed as a lookout should not be employed on other duties, and should be stationed in that part of the vessel where he could best sec. There was a look-out on the Vesper acting as helmsman, who admits that he did not see the lights of the Manurewa until the bowsprit of the Manurewa was across bis deck. In the opinion of the Court, the Vesper did not keep a vigilant look-out. The Court was satisfied that both vessels had their lights burniug brightly, and concludes that the position of the look-out on the Vesper was not the best, or that he wis not vigilant.

With regard to the Manurewa, the evidence bhowed that there was a lookout kept at the proper place a few minutes before the collision; that the master took the look-out from his post to attend, to other duties aloft. In the opinion of the Court, the master was not justified in taking the look-out Jj-om his post without placing someone there in his stead. His taking the man off the look-out was inexcusable. The Court was satisfied that if the look-out had been at. his post he must have seen the red light of the Vesper approaching. The Manurewa, being on the port tack, and being the vessel that would have to give way to a vessel approaching on her starboard bow, should have been exceptionally careful to see that a sharp look-out was kept for vessels approaching from that direction. The master of the Manurewa did not do so, and in the opinion of the Court he was to blame in that respect.

With regard to the look-out, the Court found that both vessels were in fault, and that if a sharp look-out had been kept on both vessels the collision would not have occurred.

The nest question was as to the conduct of the vessels after they caught sight of one another. The Vesper's duty was to keep on her course, but, at the same time, if he could in any way help the other vessel in the event of a risk of collision, it was his duty to do so. The Court could not see that they could find any fault with the Vesper just before the collision. She was keeping on her course and had a. right to do so.

On the question of costs, the Court were of opinion that the costs must be borne by both vessels, two-thirds by the Manurewa and one-third by the Vesper. They were so apportioned for the reason that the Manurewa was somewhat more to blame., being on a port tack iii the position she occupied the balance of blame rested with her rather than with the Vesper. The Court expressed no decided opinion regarding the question of -whether an independent watch should be kept on scows. The evidence showed that of the three men employed on the scow Vesper the captain and one man were asleep at the i time of the accident. There was only one man on deck, and that man was steering the vessel, attending to her sails, and everything else. The question of whether such a state of things should be allowed to continue was one for the Department, and he would express no opinion beyond saying that authorities show very clearly that the look-out should not be engaged in any other duties. The Court did not intend to deal -vyith the master's certificate. They thought that the justice of the case would be met by mulcting the vessel with the costs of the case. If there had been a breach of collision regulations, it was a question whether the port authorities ought not to take some proceedings.