LOSS OF THE MIZPAH.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 99, 29 April 1933, Page 8

LOSS OF THE MIZPAH.

The letter written by "Amateur Sailor" is indeed premature. As one who was closely associated with the late Mr. Kelleway and who was consulted by' him in all matters concerning the ill-fated voyage, may I be permitted to refute the conjectures of your correspondent ? Mr. Kelleway and his crew were fully aware that they were to receive no remuneration whatsoever and gladly undertook the voyage as being in the nature of an extended yachting cruise, which is not subject to Marine Department regulations, and it may enlighten your readers to know that 110 sale agreement to deliver the yacht in Wellington was ever made. At his own request the late Mr. Kelleway was given written permission by the owner to sail the yacht to Wellington if he so wished; an entirely optional arrangement. Had the voyage been safely completed the crew would have been individually out of pocket after their return here. With regard to that part of the coast between Napier and Wellington the late Mr. Kelleway at my suggestion obtained first-hand information from certificated professional seamen who had been in charge of yachts and other small vessels sailing the identical course. Could he have done more? The facts as stated will be available to a nautical court if necessary. PROFESSIONAL SAILOR. Might I reply to the remarks of •'■' Amateur Sailor"? The late Mr. Kelleway was to receive no remuneration for delivering the yacht Mi/.pah to Wellington. The certificate he held did not entitle him to compete with casual master mariners, but was a purely honorary one. The standard of the examination is exact!}' the same that for a home trade master. Copies of the regulations for the examinations for masters and mates may bo had from the Marine Department. The wisdom of proceeding to sea from Napier at the time the Mizpah did is best left to the Court of Inquiry. On behalf of the late Mr. Kellewav, mariner. J. W. R. RICHMOND.