GREYCLIFFE DISASTER

Taranaki Daily News, 8 February 1928, Page 7

GREYCLIFFE DISASTER

CORONER’S FINDING GIVEN DEATHS DUE TO ACCIDENT NEGLIGENCE ON BOTH SHIPS By Telegraph—Trees Assn.—Copyright. Received Feb. 7, 9.25 p.m. A. and N.Z. Sydney, Feb. 7. The coroner’s inquest into the death of the victims of the Greycliffe-Tahiti collision, which has lasted over 25 days, has concluded, the coroner returning a verdict of accidental death. The finding said there was negligence on the part of those responsible for the careful and proper navigation of the Tahiti in exceeding the speed limit allowed by law and in not, as the overtaking vessel, taking the required necessary precaution to keep out of the way of a vessel being overtaken.

There was contributory negligence by the officer navigating the Greyclifie in not taking the required necessary precaution to ascertain, before altering the course, or at the moment when he discovered his vessel’s course was altering, as the case may be, whether or not he was being overtaken by another vessel. These acts did not', in law, amount under the whole circumstances to criminal negligence. The coroner then referred to the unsatisfactory nature of the evidence given by the captain of the Tahiti, and commented on the fact that the Tahiti left the harbour without giving any information to the police of such a proposal.

The coroner added that he had come to the following conclusions: That at the time of the collision the Tahiti had attained a speed of about 12 knots an hour. Starboarding her helm and reversing her port engine when she discovered the Greycliffe was altering her course to port probably made no substantial change in the course or the speed ol the Tahiti up to the moment of the collision. ALTERATION OF COURSE. The Greycliffe took substantially her usual course when leaving Garden Island, steering for approximately the same point that the Tahiti was heading for and attaining a speed of about nine knots per hour when her course was altered to port to the extent of from a point to a point and a half at a moment when the Tahiti was about 300 feet astern of her, and when their courses were about 200 feet apart. Whether the Greycliffe’s alteration of course was duo to a voluntary act of the ferry’s helmsman or was performed by him unconsciously through a habit developed by years of practice the coroner was unable to say. If the chains of the steering of the terry were so slack as to allow such a decided falling away in her course, which he doubted, greater care should be exercised in seeing they were kept satisfactorily adjusted. If the bow wave repulsion created by the Tahiti influenced the Greycliffe’s movements at all, it was not until the stage had been reached when a collision was unavoidable.

Although the Tahiti followed approximately the proper course for an outward bound sea-going vessel she at the time of the collision was considerably exceeding the speed limit allowed by the Sydney Harbour Trust regulations, namely, eight knots an hour. Those whose duty it was safely to navigate the Tahiti failed to detect the close proximity of the Greycliffe. Although their courses were . only slightly converging, they would on a comparatively slight alteration of the course of either, lead to an unavoidable collision owing to their relative position and speeds as the scene of disaster was approaching. The Greycliffe’s navigating officer was apparently content that while all was clear ahead there was no necessity lor him to ascertain, when he noticed his vessel alter her course slightly to port, whether he was being overtaken by another vessel, and, probably not anticipating such a contingency in view of the speed at which his own vessel was travelling, he failed to exercise the precaution required by the regulations for preventing a collision at sea to keep a proper look-out, and thus a position was created which those navigating the Tahiti had failed, as an overtaking vessel, to guard against. TAHITI CAPTAIN'S STORY. To complete the unfortunate set of circumstances that led to the disaster it appeared that the ferry altered her. course to port at an earlier stage than usual, whereas, if the alteration had been delayed for a further minute or minute and a half, the Tahiti would probably have come into view on her port side. This fact, however, if one of contributing causes of the collision, did not absolve the officers from responsibility. Further than that, the pilot In charge, who was no doubt well acquainted with the usual movements of ferry steamers plying between Garden Island and Nielsen Park, ni»y not ns»r anticipated that the Greycliffe’s course would alter until a later stage of her journey. The coroner added that other matters which he felt should in the public interest be mentioned were the unsatisfactory nature of the evidence given by the master of the Tahiti, more particularly his attempt to lead tne tiyurt io believe that the statement taken from him by he New Zealand police was chained by threats and made under compulsion, which, in view of the circumstances under which the statement was taken, the coroner regretted to say he could not believe, and was unable to attribute to unconscious bias. The coroner continued that he should mention also the fact that while the work of rescue and recovery of the bodies was still in progress and the attion of the police was fully occupied with that work, the Tahiti left the harbour in continuation of her voyage to New Zealand without inquiry being made as to whether in the interests of justice the police wished to obtain statements from those aboard her, and without any intimation to the police that she was then leaving. The sea and harbour pilots have written the State Superintendent of Navigation desiring that the high esteem In which Pilot Carson was held by-every member of the service should be placed on record and brought to the notice of the Treasurer.