NAVAL OFFICER CHARGED

Southland Times, Issue 25533, 29 November 1944, Page 6

NAVAL OFFICER CHARGED

Mishap To Arbutus (P.A.) AUCKLAND, November 28. A sequel to the mishap on October 7 last, when H.M.N.Z.S. Arbutus struck a submerged shoal off Viwa Island, in the Pacific, took place in Auckland when the commanding officer, Lieuten-ant-Commander John Alexander Rhind, R.N.Z.N.V.R., appeared before a naval court-martial. He pleaded guilty to a charge that, being in command of the Arbutus and being a person subject to the Naval Discipline Act, between September 28 and October 7, both dates inclusive, by negligence or default he hazarded the ship. He was sentenced to be dismissed his ship, and to be reprimanded. The members of the court were Commodore Dowding, D.S.C., A.D.C., R.N. (president), Captain William-Powlett, D.S.C., R.N., Commander Dennistoun, D.S.C., R.N., Commander Harper, R.N., and Commander Elworthy, R.N. The judge-advocate was Paymaster-Lieu-tenant-Commander Marrs, R.N., and the prosecutors were Commander Garner, R.N.Z.N.V.R., and Lieutenant Prebble, R.N.Z.N.V.R. Mr Lisle Aiderton was the prisoner’s friend. A letter setting out the circumstances leading up to the charge was read by the judge-advocate. It stated that before the departure of the Arbutus from Pearl Harbour on September 28, the accused received routing instructions from the commander of the Hawaiian Sea Frontier as to the course he was to take to Fiji. SETTING OF COURSES The letter set out the instructions in detail and said that when the ship was clear of the harbour, courses were set contrary to the routing instructions given. At no time did the Arbutus proceed on her route or through any of the given route points. The action of the accused in disregarding the original routing instructions and a subsequent amendment was the main contributing factor to the ship subsequently striking a shoal. “In addition to this,” said the letter, “the accused, having taken a decision to follow his own route to Suva, took insufficient care for the safe navigation of his ship in so much as only a very superficial study of the Pacific Islands Pilot, Volume 11, and the charts relating to the locality was made, resulting in a course being steered that failed to give a reasonable margin of safety off the stated danger.” “After examining the routing instructions I decided, of my own initiative, to set a more direct course with' the object of saving approximately a day’s steaming,” said a written statement from the accused. “My intention was to make a landfall to the north-west of Viwa Island, in the Fiji group. I take full responsibility for this amended course and, if blame is attachable for deviating from the route, then it is solely mine. MISHAP TO FIONA “For some unknown reason, which I frankly cannot explain, I omitted to note a reference to the s.s. Fiona having struck a submerged reef in the area in 1915,” said the accused’s statement. “Had I seen this reference I would have given the coast a much wider berth than the three miles I was allowing. There is no reference to this particular happening on the chart.” The statement concluded by saying that no blame was attachable to any of the officers or men on the ship, all of whom acted in an exemplary manner during the period of stress immediately after the ship struck. Mr Aiderton said the accused was one of the original permanent members of the R.N.V.R. in New Zealand. He was called up on the outbreak of war and was one of the survivors of the Puriri, which was blown up when she struck a mine. The accused was sent on a course in Australia and later commanded Admiralty trawlers in England. He served on the east coast of England and in the Mediterranean for two years, during which he received accelerated promotion. Later he was placed in command of the Arbutus, which he was directed to bring out to New Zealand.

Mr Aiderton said this was the first time an officer of the R.N.V.R. in New Zealand had been subjected to courtmartial procedure.