THE KAIPARA INQUIRY.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LV, Issue 14135, 15 February 1910, Page 4

THE KAIPARA INQUIRY.

MAIL STEAMER SIERRA STRIKES THE SHOAL. “MASTERLY INACTIVITY AND SUPINENESS.” KEEN CRITICISM. Evidence is now forthcoming of a fourth vessel having touched the shoal in the Auckland harbour where the Kaipara came to grief. At the nautical inquiry on Saturday Mr- Ridings, who appeared for the Marine Department, proceeded to further examine Mr.- J. M. Brigham, secretary of the Auckland Harbour Board. Mr. Ridings said: On January 31, during the course of, this inquiry, i askeu you, Mr. Brigham, dm yon remember any other vessels than the Duquesne and the IVainiate touching uottom in the Rangitoto Channel!" Witness replied; Vcs, and i replied that there was the reported touching of the Marere and the Sierra. Mr. Ridings: Of the Sierra Y "Witness: Xos, 1 think so. Mr.,Kettle: No, the Sierra has never before'been mentioned. Witness; I had the papers relating to the incident here in Court with me. Mr. Kettle: This is the very first we have heard of it. The Court should have had this information before. The witness, under examination, then proceeded to relate the circumstances of the reported striking, of the 'Frisco steamer Sierra,, in Rangitoto Channel, and read the following* reports, made at the time to the hoard b} - Captain Duder: “The mail steamer Sierra was proceeding down Rangitoto Channel, well eastward of the first two red buoys, in 1902. The Sierra struck a rock, or what the pilot supposed to'be a rock, rather heavily. It was low water, of an ordinary spring tide, and the steamer was in charge of Pilot Sainty, who reports ho was in the usual channel for such vessels. According to the latest chart there should be, not leas than from 26 to 30 feet of water there at low springs. The steamer was drawing 23 feet fore and aft.” In a‘later report, Captain Dudof stated to the board: “I have examined the spot located by the pilot where the mail steamer struck. 1 found one spot with 24 feet 6in over, the bottom being comprised of mud and sand. Thoro was no rock anywhere. The spojt has two feet loss water than is given by the chart. The pilot was about 600 feet out of the best channel as recommended by the N.Z. Pilot, and erred in judgment 'in going at such speed and choosing that course.” ■Mr. .Kettle: Was shipping-notified ? Witness; The Marino Department was informed, and numerous applications were made to leave the harbour surveyed by H.M.S. Penguin, but the board was informed the ship was engaged on more important work on the East Coast. Witness also produced a report from Captain Duder urging a survey of the harbour. , Mr. Kettle; Yes, there is no doubt that the harbour master has been constantly urging on the hoard the need for a survey of the harbour. ■Witness: Acs, that is so. - THE COURT’S FINDING. The court in the course of its judgment found that tho Admiralty chart shows the depth of water (low spring; tides) at 5J fathoms at the place where the vessel struck; but careful surveys, made since the casualty, have disclosed the fact that the depth" of water_there over the rocky patch is only 25 feet at low springs. That the evidence has disclosed, and' it is admitted by the harbour master, that the western luminous buoy is not in the position shown on the Admiralty chart, but is at least two or three hundred feet, or one hundred yards, more to the northwest. That tho master of the Kaipara was not aware, nor had he any reason to suspect, that tho information appearing on the chart was erroneous and misleading. ■■ That tho course taken by the master, as laid down by him on the chart (exhibits C, D and E), was (having regard to ■ tho information on the chart, on which he was fully justified in relying, and' the absence of any inward or outward-bound vessels) a proper and safe coijrse. As before stated, the . master was not aware of the errors in the chart before referred to. and if his vessel had not struck tho submerged and uncharted rock, which was lurking in the fairway, she would have got safely to sea beyond the harbour limits. That tho casualty was not in any way caused by the dofn.ult,- carelessness, negligent navigation, or any error of judgment on the part of the master, but was duo entirely to the erroneous and misleading information in tho chart as to (1) the depth of tho water at tho spot whore the vessel struck; (2) tho .position 'of the -western luminous buoy; 'and (3) tho absence of any warning on the chart of the existence of a rocky ]Kitch at tho place where the vessel struck. The Collector of Customs stated during the inquiry that ho made no charge of any kind against Captain Cornwall. Section 235 of The Shipping and Seamen’s Act, 1908, provides that tho court holding a formal investigation may accompany its findings with “such observations as the, court thinks fit,” and, in-tho present case, tho court considers that some reference ought to be made to the oueMion of the survey of the Auckland Harbour. It is hardly necessary to say that tho court oxpror-srp no opinion as to tho legal responsibility of the Auckland Harbour Board to those who have suffered in consequence of the' casualty. That is a question with which this court is not concerned, and has no power to adjudicate unor especially in view of the fact that the Collector of Customs did not consider it necessary to servo tho board with a copy of tho “Notice of Investigation,” and so make tho board a party to the proceedings, nor did tho board, as it had a right to do. elect tp become a-party'to tho proceedings, or ask the court for leave to appear as a party to tho proceedings. i SUGGESTIONS/ The Court suggests that it is one of the first duties—probably the most important duty—of every harbour board entrusted with tho managementand control of a harbour under and subject to the provisions of The Harbours Act, 1908, to cause a thorough and reliable survey to bo made of the principal waterways or channels within the harbour limits; and leading to the wharves, docks, etc., along which waterways or channels ship owners are invited or entitled to send their, ships ■ and that masters of vessels should he furnished with accurate and reliable charts (containing tho best up-to-date information thkt can bo procured as to depth of water, hidden dangers lurking

in the fairways, position of lights and buoys, and such other useful and'necessary information), so that they may be able to navigate their vessels in and out of port with confidence and safety. According to the evidence before us no such sunoy has been made of the Auckland Harbour by or under the direction of tbo Auckland Harbour board. It appears from the evidence that the rooky patch on which the Kaipara struck is in tbo fairway of tire Rangitoto Channel. The evidence satisfies us that it was in all probability on tins same rocky p,atch that the French war siiiDuquesne (a modern vessel) touched in 1890, twenty years ago. The copper sheathing recently found by tile diver o fi one or^the rocks is in our opinion strong evidence that the war snip grazed the rock- when leaving the harbour at low springs under the guidance of the harbour board pilot and drawing about 26it. AVe are also convinced that the s.s. AVaimate touched the same patch when leaving the harbour in July, 1904, at low sjirings, and drawing a Bout 25ft 9in. The correspondence relating to tho Duqesnc and AVaimate incidents produced by the secretary of the harbour board clearly shows that although in 1901 the harbour master on at least two occasions urged the board to have the harbour ro-surveycd, and although tho board was fully aware that vessels wore reported to have struck something in the fairway of tbo Rahgitoto Channel, when according to the depths shown on the chart they ought not to have done so. no real and determined effort. Ims over been made by the board to search for bidden dangers or to make or procure an exhaustive survey of tbo Channel and harbour. It was not until the Kaipara struck the same rocky patch and became stranded in the fairway of Rangitoto Channel, that a, . proper search was made and the true position and extent of the patch ascertained by tbo master of tho Kaipara (Capt. Cornwall) and those who assisted him. , * ' Tho correspondence and minutes of the board relating to tbo Duquesne and AVaimate incidents, and tho necessity for a survey of the harbour, speaks for themselves, and in our opinion justify us in saying that, in regard to the all important matter of the survey of the Auckland harbour, masterly inactivity and supiiienoss seem to be prominent characteristics of the conduct of the board.- The word “deferred” is very prominent throughout the minutes and correspondence. . In'tho Court’s opinion there is an urgent necessity for an early and exhaustive sfirvey of the Auckland harbour, and more especially of the main waterway known as Rangitoto Channel and from tho harbour limit at Rangitoto Beacon to the wharves.

FINDING RECEIVED AVITH APPLAUSE. Mr. Kettle, in conclusion, remarked that it was rather remarkable that the evidence in regard to the accident to the ’Frisco mail steamer Sierra bad only, boon disclosed at the last stage of the proceedings, and,after tbo inquiry bad really closed. The only excuse for its non-production was because it bad not been asked for; and it was not asked for, because it was not known that tho ship had struck. In regard to tho question of costs, Mr. Kettle added, tbo master of the Kaipara bad been the only party named to the inquiry. The Harbour Board had not been made a party to the pioceodings. Captain Cornwall bad come through it all with clean hands, and could not bo asked to pay any of tho costs of the inquiry.:.. Tho Marino Department would, therefore, have to be asked to pay them. Captain Cornwall and bis officers would be handed back their certificates, and they deserved ro be complimented on tho manner in which they had extricated their ship from the trap into, which it had fallen. The conclusion of the Court’s finding was met, with • a loud outburst of 'applause from the crowded Court loom, and this lasted for some moments. “This is quite unseemly; you are not in a theatre, but in a Court of Justice,” copiroented tbo President of Ihc Court, but although tho demonstrative method' of approval accused, Captain Cornwall was surrounded bv a largo ••inmoor of those present, and amidst much j andshakiiig, heartily congratulated on the outcome of the inquiry. i