STRANDING OF THE KOWHAI.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLVI, Issue 14985, 12 August 1919, Page 5

STRANDING OF THE KOWHAI.

CHIEF OFFICER AT FAULT,

! At the magisterial inquiry at . Wellington into the. stranding of the steamer KowhM on Farewell. Spit on June 9, the CourT found -that the>course sefciby the master at, 4.5 a.m. -was a. reasonably safe one, and' did- not consider; that 'the master contributed -, to -the casualty.. It could not see whaV could have -caused the vessel to run ashore at the -point at which- it did if the course set had been followed. The chief officer, m the opinion of the* Court,, did/ contribute to the casualty. He ' went to the ,chartroom to get a cup' of tea, and a .very short time after \his return the vessel -was in 1 a dangerous position. The Court thought that "if he had remained on the bridge and kept a good look-out he jnight have .been able to see the danger t in 'time to avoid it. The master was able to reach the .bridge and order the vessel astern before the chief oflker took any action; The Court ordered the chief officer's certificate '\ to be suspended for three months, and f ur^ ther ordered the chief officer to pay half the costs of ,the inquiry.. .'■-.. The second officer,, the." Court found, did no£ contribute to the casualty, and his certificate would be "#lturned.. Mr A. W. Blair, who appeared for the first and, second officers, suhinitted that the Court hajd .'not' the power. to suspend the first officer's certificate; for two reasons. First, the Court had not found any wrongful act or default on the officer's part, and such: finding, was necessary before his . certificate could be suspended. Secondly, su.b-section 5,---section 238, of the Shipping and Seamen's Act, provided that a certificate 1 should not be cancelled, or suspended unless a copy, of , the report or statement of the case on which the investigation or inquiry had been ordered had been furnished, before the commencement of the investigation or inquiry, to the holder of the certificate. The chief officer had been served with the report or statement of the case only at 10.30 a.m. Tuesday, and the investigation had been begun, on Monday morning. Replying to Mp Blair's first contention Mr Riddell, S.M., said the Court - had found the chief officer was guilty of negligence. Mr Blair: But it has to find; he was guilty of, wrongful act : or. default, and the Court lias not - found ; that , he was guilty of any. wrongful act. Mr Ridde,U .saw! it,' wag... a technical objection that had been raised, but it was good, and must be upheld. The part of the order relating to the,suspension of the certificate would be deleted, and the certificate returned on payment, by the chief , officer, of half the, costs of the inquiry. l . '' ' Mr. Blair questioned^ whether the Court had power, to impound the certificate, pending^ ; the^ paynient . of costs; Mr Riddell agreed that it' was doubtful whether the' Comt, could hold', the; certificate*. It would/ merely order tlie payment of h'atf th£ \cosis