THE DUCO CASE.

Evening Post, Volume LXXIX, Issue 116, 18 May 1910, Page 3

THE DUCO CASE.

CONCLUSION OF EVIDENCE.. Finality (so far as the taking of evidence was concerned) was reached in the Duco insurance case yesterday after The Post went to press. The claim was for £500 for an insurance policy on the s.s. Duco, .which was lost in September last. The parties to the claim were the Wellington Harbour Ferries Company, Ltd. (plaintiff) and the Corporation of the Royal Assurance Company (defendant). The case was heard before Mr, Justice Chapman and a special jury. Mr. C. P. Skerrett, K.C., with him Mr. F. G. Dalziell, appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr. J. H. flosking, K.C. (Dunedin), with him Messrs. A. A. S. Menteath and W. H. D. Bell, for defendant company. After the hearing of evidence had concluded Mr. Hosking enquired if his Honour had decided to put the issues to the jury. His Honour intimated that he did rot intend to do so at present. r Mr. Hosking stated that in his opinion the issue which should be put was, was the ship made as seaworthy as such a ship could be? In addressing the jury Mr. Skerrett said the matter was of supreme importance to the shareholders of the comoiny. It was an important fact that it was lot alleged in the pleadings that the Duco was unfit for the venture she was sent on when she was lost. It was not open to the defendants to contend that she was unfit to voyage to the Chathams. The Duco was not insured as a tug : she was insured by the insurance company, they knowing what she was and what her trade was. It was impossible for them to contend that the boat was not suitable to go on a fishing trip to the islands if she were properly laden. The insurance company was well aware of its risk, and doubtless it made the premiums proportionate. The questions the jury had to consider were three : — Firstly, as to seaworthiness; was it proved that the Duco was so deeply laden as to be unsafe; (2) was it proved that the Duco was so improperly laden that her stability was endangered or rendered unsafe? These, were the two main questions. There was another : Was it proved to their satisfaction that the deck cargo rendered the ship unseaworthy because it interfered with navigation or the steering geaT? The case (continued counsel) involved the very important question : Was an owner justified in loading his ship down to the Board of Trade load line? If not, local trade would be under a disadvantage as compared with foreigners. It was a monstrous suggestion that an insurance company should have a right to interfere in this matter of lading. Mr. Skerrett stressed the value of the rnetacentre and the unshaken expert evidence for the plaintiffs. Mr. Hosking contended that the question was whether the ship was seaworthy. The load line put on the Duco at Home had been painted out, and nobody thought any more about it. The vessel was not built for carrying deck cargo, and the coal she carried on her last trip, counsel suggested, was not lashed. In alluding to the expert evidence, he submitted that for the purpose of practically deciding whether or not the ship was seaworthy the judgment of practical men could not be set aside. « The court then adjourned until next day. 3