NO SUGGESTION OF PILLAGING

Southland Times, Issue 24001, 16 December 1939, Page 4

NO SUGGESTION OF PILLAGING

men charged, in COURT REMOVAL OF CARGO FROM WAIKOUAITI On December 2 a number of men left Bluff in two launches to go to the stranded intercolonial vessel Wmkouaiti. Eleven of these men " the boat and several took ar^. les . 0 cargo away from the wreck, th“*mg that they were entitled to one-third of the value of anything they salv ®S For this reason the goods were taken to the Customs office. . However, the boarding of a wreck and the taking away of any cargo is not permitted -without .the. permission of the master arid the men thus committed an offence.' Six men appeared Hanning, . “‘"■•J Waitiri, lan Barry Rodenque, Robert Arthur Aitken and Charles Maurice Frisken, all of Bluff, were each charged with boarding the wrecked steamship Waikouaiti without the consent of the master and with wrongfully carrying away part of the apparel of the ship. Alfred Joy, of Bluff, was also charged with boarding the ship without the consent of the master. . These men, who appeared in Court, were represented by Mr G. J. Reed. Also charged with boarding the ship were Harold Francis Ashwell, William Henry King, John Clements, Thomas Stewart Shepard and Hugh Phillips. The first three pleaded guilty by letter, and the other two made no appearance. Several of these men were also charged with taking away cargo. The charge against the men was laid under the Shipping and Seamens Act, said Detective-Sergeant R. Thompson. On December 2 the defendants went out to the Waikouaiti and boarded the boat without the permission of the master. They took away a quantity of goods and brought them ashore, the Customs Department later taking possession of the articles. The charges were laid to bring before the general public the fact that no one was allowed to board, or take anything from, the ship without the mastef’s consent. This applied to all wrecks. A false opinion existed among some of . the public tnat anything they found in this manner they were quite entitled to remove. This was not the case. The charges would be a warning to the public in the event of a similar position arising in the future. The maximum penalty for the offence was £5O, but the police were not pressing for a heavy penalty. ATTITUDE OF POLICE “No one could have been fairer than the detective-sergeant in his statement about the prosecution,” said Mr Reed, “and indeed the attitude of the police has been more than fair.” It might be thought the charge was one of ordinary pillaging from a wrecked ship, but the attending circumstances showed that this was not the case. There was no suggestion of cargo pillaging. Most of the defendants were fishermen at Bluff and some of them were at Stewart Island when the Waikouaiti stranded. When they returned to Bluff, the men decided to go out to the wreck on the afternoon of Saturday, December 2, and have a look at the boat and the salvage operations. The Marina had completed the salvage work when they arrived and the boat had been abandoned by the master and first mate. Some cargo was floating about near the wreck and portion was placed in the launches, the intention of the men being to bring the goods to Bluff and hand them to the authorities. That there was no suggestion of pillaging was shown by the fact that one of the launches in which the men went out, took the goods immediately to Bluff, where the men handed the articles to the Customs Department. In the meantime the other launch had gone to the oyster wharf so that the men could change their wet clothes. The defendants were under the impression that they were entitled to one-third of the- value ,of anything they salvaged and had delivered the goods to the Customs Department for that reason. There was no suggestion of dishonesty. The charges of taking away cargo were withdrawn by leave of the Court, but each of those charged with boarding the vessel was fined £l/10/-.