LYTTELTON.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 3360, 15 January 1879, Page 3

LYTTELTON.

Tuesday, Jan. 14. (Before H. R. Webb and J. T. Rouse, Esqs.) Desertion.— John Trot was charged by Captain Scoular with deserting from tho barque Examiner. — Captain Scoular stated that on Dec. 18, when the vessel was getting under weigh, accused jumped overboard anil swam to fche boat of a ship lying a little distance ahead. There was a fair wind at the time. Accused had been very impudent, and also refused to do what he was told. As a summons had'been taken out againsfc Captain Scoular by accused for assault, the Bench adjourned the furthor hearing of the ca9e until Friday nexfc. , Breach op tiie Harbour Regulations. -—Captain Davis, master of the barque John JEnox, was charged on the information of Captain M'Lellan, the Harbour Master, with ref usiog to remove his vessel when ordered to do so yesterday morning. Mr H. N. Nalder appeared for the Harbour Board, and Mr Izard for Captain Davis. Captain M'Lellan said : lam Harbour Master and Pier Master. Defendant is master of the John Knox, which . was berthed at the Tunnel Wharf on Dec. 30. On Friday, I gave Captain Davis notice that ho would have to move to Peacock's Wharf, in order to allow the barque Charles Deering to take her berth, as that vessel was drawing tao much water to allow of her going to Peacock's Wharf. I senfc the pilot to him on Saturday with tho orders to move either on Saturday night or early on Monday morning. On Monday, at G a.m., I went on board the John Knox, and saw Captain Davis, wlio handed me a letter which stated that as the Adelphoi had not left Peacock's Wharf at that time, ho refused to remove his vessel until there was a clear berth to remove her to. I told him he would have to move the vessel, but he refused to do so, and I had to remove her myself. When the first line was cast off from tiie wlinrf Captain Davis left the vessel, and told the mate not to allow any of the bands to touch a rope. I had to remove the vejßsel then my.elf wifch other assistauce to one of fcho buoys. Cross-examined by Mr Izard : I am in chargo of the wharf, representing fche railway autlioritics. The berth at Peacock's wharf was occupied by tho Adelphoi afc 6 a.m. I told Captain Davis fchat I wanted him to move on account of tho tide. Ifc was convenient for the John Knox to remove to Peacock's wharf as well as fco fche Charles Deering. The John Knox might have been alongside the Adelphoi afc Peacock's wharf by 8 o'clock had she been moved afc once. The draught of wnter of the Charles Deering was too greafc to allowof 1 er being berthed at Peucock's wharf, while the John Knox's draught of water would allow of her going to thafc wharf and finish her discharge. Reexamined by Mr Nalder: The John Knox's tonnage is 291 tons. She is, according to the Harbour Regulations, allowed seven days to discharge hor cargo. The John Knox has been alongside fche whaif 11 days, and has had a reasonable supply of trucks. Tho Adelphoi loft tho wharf shortly after 10 o'clock, as fcho tug engaged to take her oufc was engaged elsewhere. Tho John Knox, .had she been romovod over to th. Adelphoi, mighfc have got alongside the wharf before that, as the Adelphoi would have hauled ahead, and allowed the John Knox to drop into the wharf. By the Bench : The Adelphoi had two trucks of coal leffc in her on Saturday night, and she got rid of fchat coal by 9.45. The John Knox would have lost about two hours altogether in shifting. Had the Charles Deering not been brought in then, she would have lost that tide. Mr Izard submitted fchat no offence had been committed. The offence was alleged to hare been committed.

under the Harbour Regulations, but the Regulations had not been proved as official copies. He then referred fco clause 57 in the Regulations, which stated fchat on a vessel arriving afc any wharf, she should proceed with her loading or discharge until finished, without stoppage, during proper hours. Mr Nalder quoted clause 41 in the Regulations, and was of opinion that clause 57 meant only that all due diligence was to be used during working hours, which might be made from 6 a.m. te 6 p.m., should ifc be considered nece3sary. He submitted that clauses 51 and 57 were bearing on totally distinct subjects. Mr Izard submitted that the information did not state fche removal of the vessel in this case was necessary for the general convenience of the shipping, which was distinctly stated in clause 41, and considered that omission was fatal to the charge being sustained. Mr Nalder submitted that the information fully followed out the clause in the Regulations, and that it was quite unnecessary for the Harbour Master to state to the master of the vessel his reason for shifting the vessel. It was the master's duty to shift his vessel when ordered to do so. Mr Izard submitted that Captain Davis had not disobeyed lawful commands, as the Harbour Master, when ordering him to move, did not state fchafc ifc was necessary for the general convenience of the shipping that he should do so, in terms of clause 41 of fche Harbour Regulations, and asked the Bench for an expression of opinion as to whether the Harbour Master was entitled to order a vessel to remove to any berth when he thought fit. Mr Nalder submitted that the Harbour Master had a perfect right to shift any vessel tliat he found ifc necessa-y to remove, and addressed the Bench in support of the charge. The Bench said ifc was very evident that clause 57 only had to do with the time occupied in the loading or discharging of vessels, and did not refer to their being shifted in any way. He held that the authority of the Harbour Mastert must be upheld, and fined Captain Davis £5| and costs. i

Wednesday, Jan. 15. (Before H. R. Webb and H. Allwright, Esqs.) Civil Case. — Hunter v. Buller, claim £11 15s lid ; judgment by default with costs.