WHY SO MANY SHIPPINGDISASTERS ?"

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 11321, 4 September 1899, Page 4

WHY SO MANY SHIPPINGDISASTERS ? "

Sib,— Having read in our local papers recently extracts from Lloyd's Register of British and Foreign shipping, my curiosity (having been a seafaring man) led me to look up Lloyd's latest returns of casualties at sea. The number of ships lost and unaccounted for at sea during the three months of last year, from the Ist of October to tho 31st of December, 1890, is appalling. It seems almost incredible, nnd reads moro like ft fairy tale. To think that such a number of disasters could possibly occur at sea during three nionthß of a year with our supposed up-to-date ships and navigation is incredible. Having read over the lists, one can only wonder why any nation allows wooden ships to be built at all. As figures are wearying to most readers, I will give you Lloyd's list in a condensed form, and class steel built ships as those of iron, and composite ships as wooden ones, and will first treat with sailing ships. During the months of October, November, and December, there were abandoned at sea one iron ship and 40 wooden ships, Broken up and condemned during during the same period two iron and 10 wooden ships j burnt at sea, one iron and four wooden Bhips i lost by collision, no iron but eight wooden ships. During the same period no iron ships foundered, but 20 wooden ships went to their doom. Lost and unaccounted for, one iron ship and five wooden ones. Under tho heading of " missing " we have three iron ships and 24 wooden ones. Under the heading " wrecked through stranding or striking sunken rocks/ &c, there were six iron Bhips and 150 wooden ones lost, making a total of 311 ships. After reading of this terrible loss of sailing ships during three months, onp , would almost think that all nations were doing their best to get fid of their i wooden couin-ships. But let us look at , the casualties amongst steamships, which ; during the same period are simply nstounding. As only a very small per--1 centage of steamers are built of wood there is no need for classification. There were six abandoned at, sea 11 broken up, condemned, &0., three burnt, 16 were in collision, seven foundered, lg ' were lost or missing, and 48 were wrecked. If such a terrible list of casualties is the i general average for ovory throe months . of the year, is it not time that some ! better and safer mode of navigation wng ! adopted? Does anyone for a moment ' think no better methods could bo adopted ) for the safer navigation of ships than at I present exists ? Why, our inothods are t at presont worse than they were in the '. days of Columbus and Captain Cook, aa . in those days their commanders and officers counselled each other. Do wo find Buch the ease nowadays ? I emphat- ) ically say no, with few exceptions. Every [ captain of the present generation woull j think it lowering to his dignity to ci nsult f his chief officer as to the safe navigation | of his ship. Certainly officers on all .-hip's verify the captain's position at sea; beyond that, his duty as to tha navigation , is at on end, A oaptain may steer his hip to perdition, aa many are, and bjj

officer has no powor fco raise his voice even to remonstrate. Why should such power be given to one man ulone to control the destinies of hundreds of lives and tens of thousands of pounds of valuable property? Take such examples as the s.s. Mohegan, which ran on the Manacle rocks off the Cornish coast, and attended with such a fearful loss of life ; the s.s. City of Paris recently piled up at the same spot. Take our unfortunate Wairarapa case, and the loss of the Tasmania. Would these losses have occurred if more than one man were made responsible for the safe navigation of ships ? I very much doubt it. It is quite time old-fashioned ideas were dispensed with, for shipmasters Can stand on the bridge or deck and exclaim, " I am the ruler of all I survey," &c. It is quite time the Board of Trade and shipmasters altered matters. Every chief officer and almost every second officer holds a master's certificate of competency in laige passenger steamers. Why are they not made equally responsible for the safe navigation of ships aa the captain ? Such would be the case were they given the power by the intervention of the Board of Trade and shipowners. The misnomer "Captain" should be dispensed with and a different classification of officers substituted. They should be the chief and second commanders, chief and second officers, &c. The chief officer would be a degree higher than at present. The first and second commanders would always consult eaoh other aa to the best and safest methods o£ navigating their ship. The chief commander should be held responsible for taking his ship in and out of port, after that every course should be approved of by each other. If differences arise the chief officer should be consulted with equal power as the first and second commanders for the safety of the ship. If three men instead of one were held responsible for the safety of ships by the Board of Trade, we should not hear of half so many wrecks, which now take place through " errors of judgment," and a very grave responsibility would at times be relieved off one man's mind and discipline would also be maintained. There is no doubt that a number of the " errors of judgment" that now occur are through the egotistical ideas that many captains have of their own infalibility. The sooner a change takes place the better it will be for all concerned. It would be ridiculous to argue that two clever writers could not edit a paper better than one, so also would two commanders add greatly to the safety of navigating ships. — I am, &c, Master Makinek. Napier, September 2nd, 1899.