THE ABEL TASMAN

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLII, Issue 20493, 11 August 1936, Page 9

THE ABEL TASMAN

INQUIRY INTO WRECK FINDING OF COURT By Telegraph —Press Association GREYMOUTH, August 10. At the Abel Tasma inquiry, counsel delivered addresses this morning. Mr Foden criticised the Harbour Board, alleging laxity of control and mooring arrangements. Mr Kitchingham defended the Board, saying if the port had a defective system the Marine Department should draw attention to it and endeavour to remedy it. In the last 70 years only three vessels had broken away from the wharf, and the breakaway of the Omana was due to a defective shackle. Mr Kirkcaldie claimed that the evidence exonerated Captain Archibald, and submitted that there was no evidence that the vessels equipment was unsatisfactory.

The Court adjourned and will resume at 4 p.m. The Court was asked five questions, to which it returned the following answers.

1 — (a) Was the vessel moored in accordance with the practice of the harbour?—Yes. (b) Was the vessel moored to the satisfaction of the harbourmaster?—Yes. The evidence shows that both the harbourmaster, the vessel’s master and officers had given strict attention to the safe mooring of the vessel. 2 Could the practice of the harbour as to moorings in flood conditions oe improved by the Harbour Board providing special moorings for floods?— Yes (memoranda to be prepared embodying the recommendations). 3 Is it possible that the casualty would have been avoided if the engines had been turning and ready for instant use?—Not in our opinion. (The reasc.is to be amplified in a report to the Minister of Marine).

4 Was everything possible done to the vessel after she broke away?—Yes. The Court considers that the master, officers, engineers and crew acted in a prompt, seamanlike manner and are to be commended therefor, the master in particular. 5 Was the casualty caused or contributed to by the wrongful act or default of the master or any of his crew or of the Harbour Board or ~ny other person?—Not in so far as the master or any of his crew were concerned, but the Court desires to further consider this question in relation to the Harbour Board and its officials. The master, William Archibald, end the first mate, Peter Dalziel, had their certificates returned to them unendorsed.