WIDOW'S CLAIM.

Press, Volume LXI, Issue 18550, 27 November 1925, Page 13

WIDOW'S CLAIM.

£ISOO FOR DEATH OF HUSBAND. ECHO OF RIPPLE DISASTER. (PRESS ASSOCIATION TZLZGEAJt.) WELLINGTON, November 26. The hearing of tlio claim of Mrs Maud' Ellen Nicholson against Richardson and Co.. Ltd., of Napier, for £IoCX3 aw compensation for tho of her husband, who was chief officer of the .steamer .Ripple when it was wrecked in August, 102-1, was continued to-day. Captain Petersen was called for the defence. Ifr. gnvo evidence that ships' officers supervised tho stowage of all deck cargo, and the final decision whether a vessel was to put to sea rested with the captain. When the R.pple loft tho_ wharf sno was in. the best of trim. ISo far as ho could tell she was perfectly upright. The list of dec* cargo from tho manifest showed that carried twenty-eight casKs on deck and 500 feet or a, ooiiplo of slings of timber, altogether 9J tons weight, while 19 tons of dead-weiglit were allowed. 'Hie lwrrcls were securely lathed, standing on their ends and stowed between tho hatch coamings and tho bulwarks. The vessel would have to turu over before they would move. To tho foreman of tho. jury: Tiro ">O-gallon casks could he put over the sido by hand if if became, necessary to .jettison them in heavy weather. Cross-examined, Captain Petersen gave details of tho lashing of casks. If one came adrift all the lashings would tend to slacken. Though it was calm when the, R.ipple left, a furious storm developed that night. The man who had to bo satipiicd with the disposal and securing of the deck cargo was the chief offuxT. Captain James Edward Dawson, harbourmaster, "Wellington, said sailing conditions were quite suitable for the departure of the Ripple. Frank Edward Pnddick, Harbour Board signalman, "Wellington Heads, gave evidence as to the weather when the Ripple cleared tho Heads. Alan Thomas C'astello, a seaman in the Manuka, gave evidence as to tho list with which the RirHe left port. Law Complied With. Captain H. F. Tomlinson, marine surveyor for tho Marino Department, gavo evidence that the Ripplo complied with every provision required by law when she ieft Wellington. He inspected. Iter about half an hour before sailing. There were only two tons more weight jn tho casks on the starboard side than on the port side. Tho effect of this two tons of unevenly distributed weight would be largely neutralised in a. full vessel, and as tho extra starboard weight was towards the centre of the deck, it would not affect the stability of tho vessel. James .Henderson, at one 'time mate Vi tho R.ipple, said she was an easy ship to trim and was tho best seagoiug vessel ho had been in. Coastal vessels nearly always carried deck cargo.

. Contradictory Evidence. . Several other witnesses gav.o evidence. Some said tho vessel had no perceptible list when sho left port, others said when tho vessel left the harbour on August b'th she had a decided list to port. Costello, an able, seaman in the Moeraki, giving evidence for the plaintiff, said tho Ripplo had a big list. Had tho wharf not been there she would have turned over. When leaving port the Ripplo had a list of at least eight degrees. Henderson, ■Marino Surveyor, formerly an officer in the Ripple, said she was au excellent soaboat, a little touchy, but -easy4o trim. It Was usual to lo.'id the vessel with a list towards tho wharf in order to save rubbing against tho piles, tho list beinjj trimmed out of her afterwards. Cross-examined, he said a list of eight degrees would bo dangerous in bad weather. Henry. Guthrie,- foreman stevedore. who had charge of. tho loading, said all the heaviest cargo was placed in tho hold first. It consisted of fencing wire, corrugated iron, and jarrah timber. Ho denied emphaticalil.y that there was a list on tho vessel during any portion of the day of sailing. A tally clerk said there was no list on tho vessel when slip left port. Noa-Suit Applied Tor. 'Mr Watson, for defendant company, mado formal application to have tho caso withdrawn from tho jury, on tho grounds that the only possible r.egligenco was negligence on tho part of the lato chief officer., who was responsible for tho loading of tho vessel. His Honour promised to consider tho point after both counsel had addressed tho jury. Tho caso was adjourned until tomorrow.