LOSS OF THE JANE DOUGLAS.

Colonist, Volume LIV, Issue 13316, 17 January 1912, Page 2

LOSS OF THE JANE DOUGLAS.

FlIs Ti)iNGS OF TME GOUlif , THE CAPTAIN MULCTED IN COSTS. When the inquiry into the wreck of the- steamer Jane Douglas resumed yesterday afternoon, Mr. Evans, S.M., said ho had received a letter from Brown, one of the creVf, desiring that certain questions bo asked. Tile Court desired the fullest inquiry, and if Mr. BfCKrn wished to give further evidence he would» be? given an opportunity to do.so. Mri MSRinnity, who appeared for Captain VenfldK!! sajd tlie evidence must be limited to tlie d;i? when the vessel was lost. G. McC. Brown stated that he could "not swear that lie noticed the captain to bo Uiidei' the influence of liquor on the night in quo'stkiii; Liquor was carried aboard the vessel. Injjfffw (the mate) and Young (the fireman) might have some evidence to give. Captain Vendore omitted to state that lie was ashore jii the Sounds, when no dnmage was doik!. He «ould' not swear that Captain Vendoro was Uiid?)1 the influence of liquor. Ai Ingram (the mate) stated that he was tfii duty' *jli, th« jiight y in question until ten o'clock. Oa'ptahi Vf ndorc was oil the deck most of tiie. time and witness was talking to him. He saw no one under the influence .of liquor, and the captain was no different to what lie appeared now. The catain was sober all tiie time, perfectly sober. The captain had a very ticklish job to bring his vessel out of the- difficult berth at Wellington, o\vl''g to the ferry steamers and tlio wind blowing. Arthur Young stated that he was on duty that night from six till twelve. He spoke to the captain twico. There was nothing to show that the captain was under the in..fluence of liquor. He was perfectly sure the captain was not under the influence of liquor. When picked up the captain showed no indication of being in liquor. This closed the evidence, and after reading for some time, the following findings were announced by Mr. Evans, S.M. :— 1. That it was a moonlight niglrt and sufficiently clear to see the land ! bo as to enable the ship's position to be ascetained from time to time. 2. That the vessel struck the rock at or about high water. 3. That at that time there was no rip or cross currents to set the vessel out of her course. 4. That the sea was moderately high but not sufficient to set up a spray such as would hide the rock from view considering the clearness of the night. •5. That the wind blowing at the time would not put the vessel out of her course. On the foregoing facts we arc un-j able to put the casualty down to! either inevitable accident or mere error of judgment, and no satisfactory reap-on has been shown for the vessel striking the rock. We find also that the vessel left port well found and all hands sol'rr and fit for duty. The Court finds that the Jane ! Douglas was lost by reason of tlie fact that in the opinion of the Court Captain Vendor© did not use sueir vigilance as was reasonably exprfted to him under the circumstances disclosed by the'evidence, but not to the extent of rendering himself so culpably negligent as to warrant a suspension of his certificate, but the Court is of <minion that the captain should pay the costs of the enquiry. The costs were assessed as follows: Witnesses £B_lßs, assessors £14 15s, Court fees £1; total £24 13s Od,