TO PAY OR NOT TO PAY?

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 817, 14 May 1910, Page 3

TO PAY OR NOT TO PAY?

DUCO'S INSURANCE. MR. SKERRETT FOR THE OWNERS. HYDROSTATICS, ETC. The state of the steamer Duoo when she put to sea on her last voyage to tie Chathams was further investigated before Mr. Justice Chapman and a special jury of twelve, at tho Supreme Court yesterday. The case, which had already occupied fee' Coart two full days, was a claim by the Wellington Harbour Ferries, Ltd., the owners of the Dueo, against the Corporation of the Royal Exchange Assurance, for £500 insurance money in addition, to interest on tie same and costs of action- The claim waa regarded as tie first of a series, the Duco having been insured with several companies for amounts totalling £2500, and all of them having declined to pay. The principal point which the defence sought to establish was that one.of the conditions of the insurance policy had not been fulfilled by tho owners, in that the steamer was not seaworthy when she departed on her fatal trip.' The defence (which was heard first) was in the hands of Mr. J. H. Hoskihg, E.C., Mr. A. A. S. Menteath,- and Mr. W. H. D. Bell, while' Mr. 0. P. Skerrett, K.C.. and-Mr. P. G. Dalziell appeared for the plaintiffs^ The Mate of the Duco. Captain Beradall, further: cross-ex- ; amined by Mr. Skerrett, 'said he knew the late Mr. Waddilove, mate of the Duco, who was an experienced and competent officer. ; To Mr. Hosking: Mt. Waddilove joined tho Duco the day before she sailed and would naturally rely on thecaptain's judgment as to her seaworthiness, having no time to make investigations for himself. Witness had no instructions from' the underwriters to keep an eye on the Duco. Cecil GrenviUe Horn, retired seacaptain, and formerly a lieutenant in the Navy, said ho' had acted as assessor in marine inquiries in New Zealand and. other conntries. He knew the Duoo fairly well and had often travelled about the harbour on her. In his opinion she was not built for a cargo boat, and he did not consider her design suitable for a ship to carry passengers. Effect of the Alterations. With regard to the alterations made prior to her first voyage to the Chat'hams, witness expressed the opinion that the effect of each one was to raise her centre or gravity. Assuming that the centre of gravity originally was not too low, he considered that the raising of it was a' disadvantage, so far as stability was concerned. The effect of the centre of gravity of a ship being too low was to make her motion quick and jerky. Anyone who had been to sea would recognise in a moment the difference between a ship whose centre of gravity was too low and one whose centre of gravity was too high. If a bailing ship were taken' to sea with her centre of gravity too low there would be; a danger of her masts being shaken out, or in the case of a steamer the funnel might be shaken out. When.he knew the Duco as a tug she was, slow in rolling and recovering. The movement" of passengers on deck had '■ a noticeable effect. He thought then .that she would have been unsafe if she earned, the maximum number, of .passengers she was allowed to—namely, 421. She did not err on tho side of stiffness when she was a tug, but quite ,the reverse. It would not,take much move--ment of weight to put her over. The . offect of the alterations was to make her less stiff. Apart from the question of draught, the coal placed'in tho'forenold would have a tendency to raisethe centre.of gravity. The coal on the engine-room floor would be beneficial to her stability. A two-ton water-tank, placed on tho deck aft, would have a bad effect on her stability. The extra boat on the fore-hatch'would have a very slight tendency to decrease the stability. The. manner of loading decidedly decreased the stability of the ship.,'. ... ~,.. , ....;; „. Danger of the Tank. • ■ With regard to the coal on deok not being lashed there. would be a tendency for it to slide down aft in a head sea... It i might foul the quadrant, and the vessel might get out of hand.- If tho water-tank were not lashed, there would be a danger of it getting loose and taking charge. He would not have ventured near it to secure it in such ;a case. If he had had to stow the coal .on deck, he would have stood the bags on end, and lashed them to the ship's side. It would be more difficult to secure them lying down, but a rope or a net might be passed over the top. He wouH not-have left the wharf to go to sea with that coal unlashed. The crew would have a bad chance of putting tho coal overboard if they, got into bad' weather, as they would require to look after themselves. Under the conditions "as to structure and. loading, as' described, he would not have taken the Duco to sea. He did not consider she was reasonably fit to encounter the perils she might reasonably, be expected! to meet with on tho voyage' to the Uiathams. She would have been much safer without tho deck cargo. To Mr. Skerrett: He could: not say. how far the centre of gravity of the Duco had been raised' by the alterations made, bnt did not think that any theoretical working out would prove her stability or otherwise. It seemed highly probable that tho ' connecting rods of tho steering gear running along the deck would become jammed if pieces of coal were washed under them. His evidence was entirely based on the assumption,that the coal was not'lashed.

the Alterations' Again. Richard S. Taylor, master mariner, retired, said he was at sea 17 years, and commanded large and small steam and sailing vessels. He had been for 20 years Lloyd's surveyor at: Brisbane, had acted as nantical assessor in various parts of Australia' and New Zealand, .and was the representative of .the London Salvage Association. In' the last-named capacity, he often had to go aboard ships and wrecks, and had been in command of several ships temporarily since ho left the sea-: From tho model of the Duco exhibited" in Court, ho would say .she was built for a tug and not for a cargo vessel. Boats were not built,on her lines for deep-sea trading. • Assuming that tho railway iron formerly placed in the ship as ballast was laid on the skin of the ship as a floor, the- vessel, would not bo so stilt when' this was taken out. She would bo less stable.' He did not know that sho would have'.a greater tendoucy to capsize. The effect of the alterations to the ship, as described, wonld.be-to raise the centre of gravity and lessen the stability of the, ship. The Pllmsoll Mark, Generally speaking, it was safe to load a vessel to the Plimsoll mark. Ho considered that ,no .ship should carry deck cargo. ' The Duco,' laden as described, would not bo safe with 18 'inches of freeboard. ' Mr. Hosking: Do you think the Duco, laden as described, was, fit to go on a voyago to tho Chathams?—l wouldn't like to be in her. Witness further said the Duco was rendered less /it to.encounter the perils of tho voyage by the loading placed on deck.' In rough weather, the , tank would tear, its way through tho bulwarks and go overboard. -If the ahis'

was compelled to carry cargo on deck it should be' lashed. There would tlien be more ;safoty for > the ship.. This would apply to the.coal on the deck of the Duco. In a'heaVy sea, and with the ship rolling; the crew-would-have "no show at all" in putting the coal overboard. They would have to look out for themselves. From the fact that the Duco had been plying in the harbour for a number of years, he would infer that she was •at that time. a perfectly stable boat. Cross-examined by Mr. Dalziell: .He never saw the Duco, and had never made any calculations about her .stability. As a tug stationed at Wellington, the Duco would sometimes be required to go out into the Strait to assist a ship. This would sometimes be rough work, but quite different from a voyage: to the Chathams. A tug could turn round and go back. They did not take much risk. That depends on the captain, I suppose P—No, it depends on the amount of salvage to be got I (Laughter.) Do you know now to obtain centres of gravity?—No, I don't know anything - about mota-centres. ' Then you don't know whether a boat 1b Btable or not? —Oh, yes, I do. I know from common-sense. ■• Is, tho method of loading a.ship determined by recognised definite rules, or by rule of thumb?-—I know of no definite rules for loading a ship. So far as stability is concerned, do not the same rules that are. used in building a ship apply also to. loading ft?— The rules used in building don't' always.work out,in practice.: Further questioned, witness said he knew of ships designed only to turn over; though there were probably' some of the best" experts in the world engaged in designing them.' Ho had loaded a good many ships and never had one. tujn turtle." But you don't apply any rules?—l use common-sense. Having due regard to the loading, as affecting tie owners would be justified In sendboat to sea'if she was not loaded below the'loadjine. ''.-•':''

Mr. Hosking asked his .Honour -to note that he objected to the last statement being elicited as evidence, on the ground that-'it legal .point. He did not'"consider that boats were: justified in: going to sea with a deck cargo on the. understanding that it was to he jettisoned if rough weather waß encountered; ■"'■'■ v

To .Mr. Hosking: Coal in bags was • very liable to come'loose. Irrespective of the deck cargo, he -would say! that the Duco-was not.fit to encounter 1 the winds and waves she was likely to meet. There were books giving • directions about storage, but.they, did not go into questions .about meta-centres. Although 'he did'' not make calculations about meta-centres, ,he could use the (formula with the aid.of a book. ■ This closed tho.'casefor the, defence. ' For the Plaintiffs. : Mr. Skerrett/.-in ••opening-.'for the plaintiffs, said the ship was only insured for half her' value, and the' owners were also ' liable under the Workers' Compensation Act, and the' owners'.were. therefore deeply interested in. making .the ship seaworthy. -It was true ; she was built for a tug,"and'therefore . had a comparatively small cargo capacity, -but they had. : Lloyd's\certificate that she to'carry.cargo dry up to her capacity;-It would be shown that every human-''e'ffbft-'was* made to render her as seaworthy as possible for ;both.voyages..to..the.Chathams.. The. fo'c'sle head was constructed under the j , supervision of the -Government surveyor: .The hull was carefully- over-: hauled by a Government inspector, and the machinery was likewise ' inspected, and the Government-officials 1 would be called. Everything t possible was.'done' by .the company,.- fncluding:the appoint*-.-ment of a careful,"cautious,' and experienced captain. He would ask the jury to, bear m mind Captain'Beridall's admissions' , that; the' Duco', if properly laden, was fit for >the'voyages-to the 'Chathams', and that, he, as representing ; the insurance companies,'knew'that the Duco, altered and .fitted, as she had been, was to go to the "Chathams. They could not expect to have ocean liners' for every class of- work. If so, oiir business would go to more enterprising and less timid people. The ship waa caught'in a tremendous storm, though Captain Abram, in. the exercise of .his, best.-judgment, doubtless thought he; could make the' Chathams before .■'it came on. The end of the ship was' wrapt in mystery, and it might very well have been- the fact that'whatever care had been taken to make her seaworthy . she could not have ridden ont the storm. "I Told You So." The jury .was entitled to expect the defence to prove that the ship was improperly loaded, and not so loaded as. to have the necessary amount, of stability. This was a definitely ascertainable thing, but the- witnesses' for - the.. defence had'not given the jury, anything - accurate or definite about it. The local witnesses had for years been accustomed to seeing 'the Duco running light in.'the harbour, and when they saw her'going out'loaded they would naturally think' she-looked low-in-the water. -Moreover,it was very natural ■ to be wise afterthe event and to say: "I told you so.". Counsel went on. to deprecate the.suggestion .that, the . owner was not justified in loading a;ship down to the Plimsoll mark, which was .fixed according' to the highest authorities. It would be shown that, the Duco was not loaded to the Plimsoll mark. He would call two experts in shipbuilding and. prove every particular of the construction of tho ship. .The facts about the cargo had been definitely ascertained. 1 It was surely''too late in" this year of grace to pooh-pooh the methods and principles ,of, science. .Under the •legal definition of seaworthiness, the owner was liable to mako the - ship reasonably fit for the perils likely to be encountered on" the proposed voyage. Tho non-use of appliances 'on board for navigation or securing cargo was an omission for which the captain was responsible. .. The owners had per-; formed' their duty if they placed .proper; appliances on hoard. The carryjng of deck cargo was a very frequent practice, and ; with regard, to, some'.' sorts of cargoes, - the insurance \' 'companies . insisted on deck.; It would be shown that 'the deck* cargo did hot decrease the stability of the ship. A ship was not unseaworthy if i she carried a" deck cargo that could be' readily jettisoned. The daiiger of the tank sliding about had been dwelt upon,' but tho tank, was jammed; it was also surrounded by. coal, and a blow with a chisel would have let the water out and made it harmless. It would bo shown that the coal was. in- all probability lashed. Captain' 1 Abram's ' object;' in leaving early was doubtless to reach tho Chathams before the predicted storm came' oh.. In conclusion, counsel again'asked the jury to remember the admission that the Duco was a suitable ship for'-the voyage, arid-added that it would bo proved: (1) That she was not unstable, and (2) that she was not loaded to the Plimsoll mark.-.-Tho Court-then adjourned until 10 a.m. to-day. ~ .' '.- "'■