THE COLONIST. Published Every Morning. Nelson, Friday, January 23, 1903. THE ELINGAMITE ENQUIRY.

Colonist, Volume XLVI, Issue 10623, 23 January 1903, Page 2

THE COLONIST. Published Every Morning. Nelson, Friday, January 23, 1903. THE ELINGAMITE ENQUIRY.

Now that the decision of the Court of Enquiry regarding the wreck of the s.s. Elingamite has been given, it [is well that some of the points brought out should be carefully considered, with a view to greater precautions being taken in the future so ..that the risks of similar accidents and sufferings may be avoided. During the enquiry it was stated that the distance from Sydney, to a point some seven .miles south-west of the West King was 1036 miles, but it was also stated that at the time ol the wreck 1057 miles had beer travelled, so that it was evident that the ship was in close proximity tc land. At ten o'clock on the Sundaj morning, however, the course was changed about eight "degrees more easterly, and but for that change th£ vessel might possibly liave missed fcht island. Had soundings been taker when the course was changed greatei prudence would at least have beet shown. The regulations provide thai in fog a vessel should go, only at a "moderate speed, "and the speed oi four and a half or five knots at which the steamer was travelling might fairly have been regarded as moderate if she had not been close to land. Under any circumstances, however, a proper look-out should be kept, but it appears that the passengers saw breakers and the rocks before the look-out man on the forecastle head. This was possibly due to the look-out man keeping his «yes straight ahead, and the rocks and breakers first seen appearing more to the side of the ship, but the fact proves that the look-out was insufficient. The loss of the ship was primarily due to a lack of sufficient care in navigation and the Court found .that the captain had been guilty of grossly negligent navigation in driving at fullspeed through a fog np to 10 a.m. on Sunday — the time he slowed down — when he must have] known that he was near land, in neglecting to sound before or after 10 a.m., in altering the course without sufficient, reason, in proceeding at 4J£ knots or over without sounding, in not carefully ascertaining his speed when fgoing slow ahead, and in guessing hid speed at noon on Saturday at 12 knots, when everything "pointed to a higher speed. More complete censure than that conveyed in the finding there could hardly be. It was contended, however, that the shipwreck might still have been avoided had the engines reversed promptly, and there was a great deal of evidence with regard to what transpired in the en- ! gine room. One suggestion was that wedges had been used to prevent j rattling, and that in consequence the engines could not be reversed, but it was agreed that the engines were stopped, though they did not go astern, and the fact of their stopping •, indicates that their movement was not prevented by wedges. 'Possibly the propeller, having been stopped, was prevented moving again by becoming entangled in -kelp, ■or the ship may have glided along rocks and become damaged in *; such « fashion as to have prevented the propeller working. At all events, fcUougb tb© engineer* were st Ifetir

[ posts, the engines did rioj; g6 dst'orrij and th& Ship went on td destruction. The Court declared that it could not hold the surviving responsible for what had happened, and though nothing was proved, a suspicion has been left that something was amiss. But after the wreck there was a.needless sacrifice oMife. At the r enquiry ifc waa stated that on such a large steamer as the Campania all the boats are got out in three minutes, but in the case of the Elingamite it appeared that twenty minutes waa occupied in getting out the boats t that when the bdats wer6 got diitj there was no proper management^ and-, notwithj standing the fog; boats Jind rafts were allowed fco drift apart—a circumstance to which must be attributed the further loss of life that took place. That the boats and rafts were shamefully Unready foremergeh6y haa been made plain, and it is a pity that tliose responsible for inspecting the boats and appliances cannot be got at. As the responsible officer, the captain should hate seen that the boats were equipped and provisioned, but he inight^well excuse himself on the score th,at shore ofiieers Hfß required to make inspection and see that the boats'are ready for the emergency for which they are carried.- Clearly there could not have been proper boat drill for some time, or the emptiness of the boats would have been dis* covered, and for a failure to hold boat drill the «?aptain df a ship is" certainly responsible. The Court suspended the certificate of the captain one year, and ordered him- to pay £50. It also mildly censured some of the officers. No doubt the captain is severely punished, but not more severely than is necessary to prevent in the future the ignoring of e"vory pd99ibie precaution £that can be taken for the safety of those who travel by sea. But now that the .enquiry is over it certainly behoves not only our own Government, but the Governments of adjacent colonies, to take the utmost precaution mat ships are properly equipped in every particular. All equipments belonging to a ship should bear her name, and a heavy penalty should be inflicted where proper requirements are disregarded. For some time to come requirements will n:> doubt be strictly insisted on, bu£care must be taken to prevent any relaxation of judicious regulations. I