STRANDING OF THE KAIPARA

Auckland Star, Volume XLI, Issue 24, 28 January 1910, Page 5

STRANDING OF THE KAIPARA

NAUTICAL INQUIRY BEGINS. NAVIGATION OF PORT CHALLENGED. INDICTMENT AGAINST MASTER LACK OF PRUDENCE ALLEGED. The inquiry into the stranding of the s.s. Kaipara in Rangitoto Channel on January 14th was commenced this morning at 10 o'clock in the Magistrate's Court. Mr. C. C. Kettle, S.M., presided, and with him sat Captains W. J. Reed, of Auckland, and C. F. Post, of the Government steamer Tutanekai, acting as nautical assessors. _ air. Ridings, Collector of Customs, assisted by Captain Fleming, marine superintendent, appeared for the -Minister for Marine, but was without legal assistance. Mr. T. Cotter appeared for Captain Cornwall, of the s.s. Kaipara, and the 2ST.Z. Shipping Company, and Mr. R. McVeagh watched the proceedings on behalf of the Harbour Board. The official statement of the case was as follows:—"That the s.s. Kaipara was on January 14, 1910, at 2.52 p.m.,. stranded in Rangitoto Channel, Auckland Harbour, and remained stranded until floated off and towed into the inner harbour on January 20th. By reason of the said stranding-..the said vessel was materially damaged in her starboard bilge, whereby her No. 1 and No. 2 holds were filled with water, and the vessel became partly submerged." The questions submitted to the Court were:: (1) Whether the stranding of the s.s. Kaipara was caused by any default, negligence, or error in judgment on the part of the said master or other person on board the said steamer. (2) Was the Kaipara in an unseaworthy condition by reason of the "list" to starboard, when she commenced her voyage, and what endeavours -were made by the master to ascertain the cause of such list? When Mr. Ridings intimated that he was appearing for the Minister of Marine, Mr. Kettle asked was he not to be represented by counsel. Mr. Riding 3 replied that application had been made to the Minister for counsel, but the Minister had decided that legal representation would not be authorised. Mr. Kettle said it -was a very great pity that the Minister for Marine was not represented by legal counsel, since the inquiry was a most important one. Mr. MeVcagh intimated that he was not appearing on behalf of the Harbour Board, since no charge had been made against the Board. He was not proposing to call any witnesses, but simply 'had a brief to watch proceedings on. behalf of the Harbour Board. Mr. Ridings: The Harbour Board was served with a- notice of investigation. _Mr. Kettle: Very well, let us proceed with the inquiry. "A SERIOUS CASUALTY." Mr. Ridings, in outlining the case, said that as a layman he approached the subject of the inquiry with much diffidence, owing to the Immense interests and important issues involved. The scope of the investigation included a very serious casualty to a ship of large tonnage, carrying a cargo of at least £175,000 in value, and would seem to challenge the navigation of what had hitherto been regarded as one of the best and safest harbours in the world. The scope of the inquiry also encompassed not only the safety of these waters, but serious questions'of prudence or lack of prudence on the part of the master in navigating the vessel in question, under the circumstances which would be placed before the Court. The Kaipara was a twin-screw steamer, of 7392 tons register. She left the Railway wharf at 2.5 am. on the 14th of January, in charge of Captain Cornwall. She was laden with a general cargo of New Zealand produce, valued at about £ 140,000, in addition to bullion worth £35,000. She left shortly before low tide. Before the ship was unberthed she had a list to starboard, stated to be 6 or 7 degrees. She was unberthed by Captain Sargeant, of the A.H.B. staff, and he left her at Devonport in Captain Cornwall. At the Railway wharf the vessel's marks indicated that she drew 27ft aft and •26ft forward. The vessel increased her lief after slie left the wharr, and this increased her draught. As the vessel went down the harbour she increased her speed to 12 knots. At his (Mr. Ridings') request, the master had placed upon a chart the course he had followed. From the course so marked it would be seen that so far from following the safest and most prudent course provided by the channel, as shown on the chart, and availing 'himself of the deeper water further eastward, or in mid-channel, he proceeded between the 4$ and 5J fathoms marks, in close proximity to the western luminous buoy. The result was that at about 2.50 the vessel struck something —whether a rock, a shoal, or the ordiniry bottom of the channel, remained to be proved. Two minutes later she sanlr and was submerged to her hawse pipes. Later examination showed that No. 1 and No. 2 holds were filled with water. The vessel was subsequently salvaged, raised, and docked. The master had informed him that between the time the vessel touched bottom and the time the carpenter reported 15ft of water in No. 1 hold, and 22ft in No. 2 hold, no less than -two minutes elapsed. SHOAL IN THE FAIRWAY. Another important factor in the case, Continued Mr. Ridings, was the discovery of a shoal patch showing 26ft of water at low tide, apparently in the fairway of Rangitoto Channel; the existence of which is admitted by all parties. The exact locality of this shoal would be proved by expert surveyors. Whether the ship struck this shoal remained to be proved, bait the more important question for the determination of the Court was whether the master was justified in navigating his ship, iinder all the circumstances, in to the vicinity of this shoal at all. He submitted that the mnster should have sought the safest course and not the minimum water in ivhich his vessel could float. If the master proceeded on this course, assuming that his vessel drew 2(sft fore and 27ft aft, he erred grievously and culpably, for it was a plain, irrefutable fact that the draught of his vessel was increased in direct ratio to her list. To put if shortly, Captain Cornwall failed to avail himself of the deepest, part of the channel in navigating his 'vessel,' whose draught. was problematical to a point' of danger.

CAPTAIN CORNWALL'S EVIDENCE. Newnham Robert de la Cour Cornwall, master of the Kaipara, stated that besides holding a certificate of competency he was also an officer of the Royal Naval Reserves. He had been -with the New Zealand Shipping Company since 1886, and had 'been master of the Kaipara for three year 3. He had visited Auckland as master on several occasions. The Kaipara arrived in Auckland from Wellington. The vessel had no list when travelling to Auckland. Eight ballast tanks -were contained in the Kaipara. Tanks 5 and 6 were in use by the engineers, and were joined together. All the tanks ran right across, the ship, except Nos. 5 and 6, which were independent. The Kaipara arrived in Wellington on January 12. Loading was completed on January 14. The second officer supervised the loading, under supervision of the chief officer and the commander. The dead weight of the cargo would be about 9000 tons, giving a total displacement of about 14,000 tons.

Captain Fleming: Did you have any list on the trip up from Wellington?— No.

When did you first notice a list?—On the 13th.

What precautions did you take?—l gave specific instructions to the stevedore.

What was the condition of the ballast' tanks when leaving?— The forepeak No. 1 and No. 4 were empty. The rest were full.

What coal did you have on board? —We had something like 500 tons aboard. On deck we had 190 tons of coal, which was stowed aft , , right across the deck to the waterways. By my instructions 60 tons more were placed on the port side than on the starboard side.

What was the list you had?— From six to seven degrees.

And what were you drawing when leaving?—2Gft for'ard and 27ft aft.

Was any complaint made by officers or passengers?—No, except that early in the morning the engineer passed the remark that there was a considerable list.

Continuing his evidence, under'examination by Captain Fleming, witness said there was an hour and a-half of the ebb tide to run when the Kaipara left. He understood there was a rise and fall of 10ft in the tide on that day, but did not look the matter up for himself. He thought he was quite safe in leaving the wharf at that time, and did not think there would be any difficulty in getting out of the harbour, although he knew that the list would probably give additional draught. Witness could not say whether the Kaipara was on her bottom at any time while alongside the Railway wharf. The Harbour Board tug assisted the ship in leaving the wharf. No difficulty, other than what might be expected at ebb tide, was experienced in removing the vessel.

Captain Fleming: When your vessel left the wharf, did she increase her list? —Yes, she did.

Mr. Kettle: By how much? —I cannot

Mr. Kettle: You think it would be caused by the tide and tug?— Yes.

Mr. Kettle: Did she right herself steaming down the channel?—l do not think so.

Captain Fleming: If she had a list of between six and seven degrees at the wharf, it must have been more in midehannel.—No, it was in mid-channel that the list represented about" seven degrees.

Did you think this list would render your vessel unsea worthy?—No.

Have you ever left port with such a list before?—l have done so with lists very similar , .

Did you notice that she was sinking forward ?—No.

Was the list commented on by Captain Sergeant, as he unberthed the vessel? — No.

Did Captain Sargeant make any suggestion to you of the navigation of the ship out of the harbour? 'This question 1 want you to consider carefully?— No, he did not.

What would the list increase the draught of your vessel?— Fourteen or possibly 16 inches.

Mr. Kettle: Could you have discharged the water from your ballast tanks? — Not without increasing the list.

Why were the tanks tilled as you have stated? —Wβ wanted to lighten the load for'ard, and bring the stern down.

Continuing his evidence, Captain Corn wall said that when he left the wharf he allowed for the list in navigating the channel, but only allowed a foot for increased draught. He was conversant with the latest "New Zealand Pilot," and knew that there was a special note, on page 36, dealing with surveys made in 1854 and 1885Captain Fleming: Have you ever noticed the warning given therein of the existence of an extensive bank forming on the western side of Rangitoto Channel, in the vicinity of Rough Rock?— No. I never noticed that warning. Mr Kettle: On the next page the depth in the fairway is given at 5J fathoms at low water spring tides, and seven fathoms at high water. —Yes; those depths I was depending upon. HOW THE ACCIDENT HAPPENED. Captain Cornwall then went on to tell the story of what happened after Captain Sargeant left the vessel off Devonport. The ship went full speed ahead; but was not going full power, not having gathered full way. She continued at this speed until she struck at the spot narked on the chart produced by witness. Witness had marked on this chart the course followed and the exact locality of the accident. Mr Kettle: The "New Zealand Pilot" suggests a course going out of Auckland Harbour. Did you take that course?— So; not that course. Y.Tiieh would be the safest? —I took the chart bearings, and believed I would have ample water in following the course I did. The chart shows clearly that in mid-channel or east or west of the fairway a ship must go over 5£ or 5J fathoms. There would, therefore, have been no object in going further eastward. Captain Fleming: At what speed were you travelling? —Eight knots an hour. Were the engines stopped? —Yes, immediately. Mr Kettle: Describe to us your sensations? —When we struck I heard a loud grating noise, as if the anchor was running away from the pipe. I called out to the first officer, "The anchor has taken charge," meaning that it had run away. The third and fourth officers were with mc on the bridge. "The ship then listed, and I knew that the vessel had struck something. There were several distinct bumps. The engines were stopped and fhe wells sounded. Captain Fleming: What instructions did you give the man at the wheel ?— None. The ship's head after passing over the shoal was north 18 west; she then canted starboard, and fell away to northward. How far did you travel after striking? —A cable or cable and a-half. POSSIBLE DAMAGE AT RAILWAY WHARF. Captain Ifleming! How long did it take to sound the wells? —It took two minutes to carry out the soundings. In

the forehold' a depth"ofTlSft 9in wat discovered, and in - 2fo. _ 2~hold 22Jft. I was surprised that so much water.could have been made in such a short space of time. Even now, after seeing the damage to the hull, 1 am still-surprised that so much water was made in Cucb. a short time. - - When were bearings taken?—lmmedV ately after the vessel struck. If your vessel had been so injured by bumping on the bottom at.the Railway wharf as to cause her.to. leak, would you be still surprised that so much water should have been found in het holds at .two minutes after striking?— That would undoubtedly explain it. Mr. Kettle: You altered your course to port just before the vessel struck?— Yes. Captain Fleming: When you altered your course to go between the -two •luminous buoys, why did you elect to go between the 5-fathom and the-s£-fatho:m line, instead of between the -SJ-fatKdnl line and the oj-fathom line?— Because, according to the chart, I was justified i« going over the SJ-fathom patch. It seemed to mc that I had ample, water. Is it not a fact that when in shallowi water, the ship, going at" full speed, would "smell" the ground?— Yes, I believe it would draw more water aft. Do you think you were -prudent in going over this part of the channel, under the circumstances?— Yes, accepting the chart as correct, I was justified, A SHOAL LOCATED. A shoal was afterwards located near by?— Yes. - - - - - The shoal is admitted to exist by the Harbour Board?— Yes, since the accident. Mr. Kettle: You were the first to discover it?— Yes, I hit it. (Laughter.). The shoal has since been carefullj;; marked and buoyed? —Yes. Captain Fleming: You think this shoal was in the course followed by yout —Yes, I passed over it. I took bearing* of and the red buoy at Devonport and the spire of St. Sepulchre's Church were fairly in line. —' (Continued on page 2.).