Wreck report for 'Elsdon', 1926

FOR OFFICIAL USE.

(No. 7842.)

"ELSDON" (S.S.).

THE MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1894.

REPORT OF COURT.

In the matter of a Formal Investigation held at the Moot Hall, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, on the 14th day of September, and by adjournment at the County Court, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, on the 15th day of September, and at the Moot Hall on the 16th and 17th days of September, and the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 5th days of October, 1926, before John Duguid Walker and James Thoburn Cackett, Esquires, two of His Majesty's Justices of the Peace acting in and for the City and County of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, assisted by Captain William Peterkin, O.B.E. (Nautical Assessor), Mr. John McLaren (Engineer Assessor), and Mr. John Carmichael (Naval Architect Assessor), into the circumstances attending the loss of the British steamship "Elsdon," official number 133,547, of Newcastle, which presumably foundered with all hands on a passage from Immingham to Odense, Denmark, on or about the 19th day of December, 1925.

The Court having carefully inquired into the circumstances attending the above-mentioned shipping casualty, finds, for the reasons stated in the Annex hereto, that the loss of the vessel with all hands probably occurred on or about the night of the 19th December last, on or near the coast of Jutland, in the neighbourhood of Lodbierg. In the absence of direct evidence, the Court is unable to determine the exact cause of the casualty, but conjectures (1) that the vessel may have struck a point of land on the Jutland coast during the thick fog and snowstorm which prevailed off that coast at the time, and after-wards sunk in deep water; or (2) may have taken on board so much heavy water as to smash some of the hatch covers in the well-deck and admit such a quantity of water as to cause the vessel to founder. But, as the weather at the time was not exceptionally severe, the Court does not consider the second alternative likely to happen (in the absence of mishap to machinery or steering-gear) unless some of the hatchways or deck openings were insufficiently secured. The Court is of opinion that these large hatchways with wooden covers on the well-deck of small colliers are a possible source of danger, and that a vessel of that class proceeding to sea without her hatches being first properly and efficiently battened down and secured is not seaworthy.

Dated this 5th day of October, 1926.

We concur in the above Report.

ANNEX TO THE REPORT.

This was an Inquiry into the circumstances attending the loss, with all hands, of the British steamship "Elsdon," of Newcastle, and was held at the Moot Hall, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, on the 14th day of September, and, by adjournment, at the County Court, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, on the 15th day of September, and at the Moot Hall on the 16th and 17th days of September and the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 5th days of October, 1926, before John Duguid Walker and James Thoburn Cackett, Esquires, assisted by Captain William Peterkin, O.B.E. (Nautical Assessor), Mr. John McLaren (Engineer Assessor), and Mr. John Carmichael (Naval Architect Assessor).

Mr. Burton appeared for the Board of Trade and Mr. Henry Temperley for the owners.

There were no formal parties to the Inquiry.

The "Elsdon," official number 133,547, was a single screw steamship schooner-rigged, built in the year 1914 at Blyth by the Blyth Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company, Limited, and was owned by The Sharp Steamship Company, Limited, Milburn House, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Mr. Thomas William Sharp, of the same address, being appointed manager on the 3rd February, 1914.

The registered dimensions of the vessel were:- Length 245 feet, breadth 37.3 feet, and depth in hold 16.4 feet. She was of 1,521.96 gross, and 805.24 net registered tonnage, and had one triple-expansion engine of 224 n.h.p., built by the North Eastern Marine Engineering Company, Limited, Sunderland, in the year 1914, and was designed for a speed of 10½ knots. The "Elsdon" was a self-trimming collier of the extended quarter-deck type. The length of raised quarter-deck was 123 feet from stern post and the height 3 feet 6 inches, the forecastle being 26 feet long and 7 feet 6 inches high.

The bridge was 14 feet long and full width of the vessel, and between the forecastle and bridge there was a well-deck 82 feet long.

The bulwarks, which were 3 feet 10 inches high, well stayed and ran the whole length of the well, had 4 freeing ports on the well-deck 3 feet by 1 foot 6 inches, with sills 1 foot high above the deck with flat hinged doors, together with two scuppers each side 6 inches by 3 inches cut through the gunwale bar. There were also two mooring pipes each side about 18 inches by 12 inches, their lower edge being 1 foot 9 inches above the deck.

The vessel had 4 steel watertight bulkheads, viz., the collision bulkhead, 14 feet from stem and the after-peak bulkhead 16 feet from the stern post. The after hold was 70 feet long divided in two by a portable wooden bulkhead at about half the length of the hold.

On the watertight bulkhead forming the after-end of main or No. 2 hold there were 2 watertight doors about 5 feet by 2 feet 6 inches, one on each side, fitted with rods leading to and worked from the weather deck. There was also the watertight door at the engine-room leading into the tunnel, the remaining two bulkheads at the fore and after peaks being not pierced.

The cross bunker placed at the fore-end of the boiler room was 11 feet long, and its capacity 160 tons.

The forward hold was 92 feet long, divided at half-length by a wooden bulkhead which had holes on top for ventilation about 2 feet square.

The engineers were housed in steel house built at the ship's side alongside the engine casing, 25 feet long, while the captain and chief officer were placed forward alongside the saloon and charthouse respectively. The crew were housed under the forecastle.

This vessel was built with a continuous double-bottom 40 inches deep running from the after-peak bulkhead to the fore-peak bulkhead.

There was a division in the double-bottom at half length of the fore and main holds, also a centre division in the tank under the engine and boilers, making 2 tanks, to that any list on the vessel could be corrected.

Capacity of ballast taks:-

The cargo hatches were 4 in number:-

No. 1, 30 feet 8 inches by 24 feet 6 inches by 20 feet at fore-end; No. 2, 32 feet 7 inches by 27 feet; No. 3, 26 feet 10 inches by 24 feet 6 inches; No. 4, 26 feet 10 inches by 22 feet 6 inches, thereby reducing the deck area about 58 per cent.

The capacities of the holds were as follows:-No. 1 hold 27,837 cubic feet, No. 2 hold 29,567 cubic feet, No. 3 hold 25,409 cubic feet, No. 4 hold 20,306 cubic feet; total 103,119 cubic feet. The cargo carried, 1,979 tons, stowed at 52.1 cubic feet.

The vessel was of normal dimensions, her sheer forward being 7 feet and aft 3 feet 9 inches; the freeboard (summer) was 1 foot 10½ inches from top of statutory deck-line, and in winter she had 3 inches more, giving a draft of 17 feet 04 inch.

She was rigged as a schooner having 2 steel pole masts with trysails and was fitted throughout with electric light, but being under 1,600 tons she had no wireless.

She had 2 double-ended lifeboats 20 feet long by 6.7 feet broad by 2 feet 8 inches deep, stowed and lashed in chocks on top of the engineers' houses abreast engine casing. These boats were fitted with buoyancy tanks and complied in every way with all requirements of the Board of Trade.

There was also a dinghy 16 feet long open boat placed and lashed in davits on the port side abreast No. 3 hatch, which in heavy weather was placed on two wood planks on top of the hatch.

In close proximity to the lifeboats were to strong wooden chests for lift-belts (one each side), all in keeping with the Board of Trade requirements.

The signals were placed in the chart house. The compasses were one azimuth placed on top of the wheel house with mirror in the wheel house, and one spirit compass in the wheel house. The azimuth compass was last adjusted on November 26th, 1925.

There were 2 12-inch ventilators into each hold with coamings standing 30 inches above deck fitted with caps and cowls of iron standing about 5 feet above deck. There was also a ventilator 12 inches diameter into the cross-bunker with coamings 30 inches high, also fitted with caps and cowls.

Ventilators to the fore and after peaks were fitted, and led up to the weather deck and fitted with caps and cowls.

Efficient ventilation was also provided from all ballast tanks and led up above the weather deck.

The vessel was propelled by one set of triple-expansion engines placed amidships.

The engines and boilers were built, as already stated, in 1914 by The North Eastern Marine Engineering Company, Limited. The n.h.p. was 224 and the i.h.p. 1,200. The diameters of the cylinders wore 20 inches, 33 inches, 54 inches and 36 inches stroke, with a working pressure of 180 pounds per square inch. Steam was supplied by two steel boilers with three furnaces in each, the boilers being fired from the forward end. Coal was supplied from a bunker extending from port to starboard side of the vessel.

The vessel had the usual pumps for a ship of her class consisting of one circulating pump worked from the main engines; one bilge injection valve fitted in the engine room to be used if required. Two bilge pumps wore driven from the main engines, and one of them could be connected to draw water from any part of the vessel. One Westminster ballast pump 9 inches by 11 incites by 10 inches was placed in the engine room, and was arranged to draw water from all ballast tanks and all hold bilges, including the engine room bilges, and either to discharge direct overboard or through the condenser. The remaining pumps were for feeding the boilers and general services.

Separate lines of pipes were fitted through the ship for pumping out the bilges and for filling and pumping the ballast tanks.

All the tanks and bilge pipes were led to the engine room and controlled by means of valve boxes worked from the engine room; also one Dounton pump 4½ inches diameter. Suction valves and boxes were fitted to all the bilges of the holds as follows:- Main hold forward had one suction fitted to each side of the vessel; main hold aft had one suction on each side at the forward part, one suction for the well at the after part of the tunnel; in the engine room, suctions were placed on the starboard and port sides.

The ballast pumping and filling arrangements were:-One suction from fore-peak; No. 1 tank had a pipe connection to both starboard and port sides; No. 2 tank had pipes connected to both starboard and port sides and one centre suction; No. 3 tank, or engine room tank, had one suction to each side and two in the centre, this tank being fitted with a water-tight division plate; No. 4, or after tank, had one suction placed aft on each side. The after-peak had one suction, the after-peak and No. 4 tank being controlled by means of a three-way cook at the after end of the tunnel.

It was stated in evidence that the pumping capacity for all the pumps was about 500 tons per hour.

This vessel had not boon inclined by her builders, but for the purposes of comparison a sister vessel to the "Elsdon" was inclined at Southampton by an officer of the Board of Trade on the 8th September last for the purposes of this Inquiry.

The results of this experiment together with calculations and curves of stability were given in evidence. They were to the effect that, assuming the vessel loaded with homogeneous cargo with bunkers full and no water in the tanks, and the mean draft corresponding to her winter freeboard, she would have a metacentrie height of 1.70 feet.

In this condition the maximum righting lever would occur at 30 degrees, its value being 0.72 feet, and the righting lever would vanish at 69 degrees.

Upon this evidence, and upon the testimony of Captain Hedley, who is now Marine Superintendent to the owners and was master of the "Elsdon" for over 5 years and spoke very strongly as to the vessel's good behaviour at sea in all conditions of weather (in which he was corroborated by the reports of other masters), the Court was satisfied as to the vessel's stability.

The "Elsdon," which commenced trading on the 2nd February, 1914, was designed for general cargo purposes, particularly coal, and was engaged in the coastwise trade and to and from continental ports, but during the war was under Government orders.

From the 5th January to the 13th November, 1925, the vessel was laid up in the Tyne in consequence of the state of trade. The owners then decided to sail her again, and she was put on Messrs. Clelland's slipway and overhauled and repaired at a cost of £660. She had previously, in March, 1922, passed her No. 2 Lloyd's Survey, and, in consequence of a stranding in August, 1924, had been dry-docked and her hull, machinery and boilers thoroughly overhauled at a cost of some £1,000. After these repairs the "Elsdon" recommenced trading, and the following are the detailed particulars of her two voyages prior to that forming the subject of this Inquiry:-

1. Tyne-Flensburg with coal, returning in water ballast to Blyth. November-December, 1925.

Draft: Forward, 16 feet 11 inches; Aft, 17 feet 4 inches.

Allowance for density of water, ½ inch.

2. Blyth-Dieppe with coal, returning in water ballast to Immingham. December, 1925.

Cargo stowed as follows:-

Draft: Forward, 16 feet 11/2 inches; Aft, 18 feet.

Arriving at Dieppe at 7.30 p.m. on the 12th December, the "Elsdon" discharged her cargo and sailed for Immingham at 10 p.m. on the 16th December in water ballast, arriving there at 6.30 a.m. on the 18th. She then proceeded to load a cargo of coal for Odense in pursuance of a charter party entered into by the owners with the Maris Export and Trading Company, Limited, of Hull, the cargo to consist of about 2,000 tons of Thorncliffe washed gas double nuts. Although, as already stated, the "Elsdon" was designed as a "self-trimmer," the owners, on this occasion having regard to the light nature of the coal, gave instructions for her to be treated as an "easy trimmer," which meant that the trimmers would go into the holds when nearly full, and trim the cargo into the wings and ends.

It was stated that the mate sent a man into each hold to see that the trimming was properly done before the hatches were closed, and the Court has no reason to doubt that the trimming was properly done, and that the holds were substantially full.

The loading was commenced at 7.40 a.m. and finished at 8.50 p.m., having been suspended between 5.40 p.m. and 8 p.m. to give time to pump out the ballast tanks, an operation however which was still proceeding while the vessel was subsequently going down the river to sea in charge of the pilot.

The distribution of the cargo was, according to the evidence, as follows:-

Of the bunkers, 29 tons 4 cwts. were estimated as remaining over from the previous voyage. The master was instructed by letter from the owners, dated 18th November, that "if fair weather was in prospect when loading at Immingham he must try to accommodate 5-10 tons of bunker coals on top of the bunker hatch and to work this below as quickly as possible."

Accordingly, 9 tons 4 cwts. of large steaming coal was so stowed, and was said to have been trimmed partially to the forward and after ends of the hatch.

In his leaving note subsequently received by the owners, the master gave his actual draughts as l(i feet 6 inches forward and 17 feet 9 inches aft, which, with the allowance of 3/4 inch for density of water, gives a mean of 17 feet 03/4 inch.

These draughts practically correspond with those of the previous voyage, the difference in the dead weight being 6 tons.

The coal, which came from the Thorncliffe Colliery some 70 miles from Immingham, was moist when loaded, and had left the colliery between the 25th November and 18th December.

It was small coal and, according to the trimmers, ran freely; 3 wagons were left behind for want of space on the ship, and from a sample taken therefrom a Board of Trade Surveyor gave its cubic capacity at 50.3 feet per ton. From a statement put in by the owners it appears that the "Elsdon" loaded at Immingham a similar cargo of nuts on the 23rd July, 1924, when the weight was 2,006 tons 19 cwts.

The Humber pilot, Mr. George Rial, who had been telephoned for from the pilot office during the afternoon to take the vessel to sea when the loading was finished, arrived at Immingham at 5.50. He was then informed by the berthing master that the "Elsdon" would not be ready for some time; and when he subsequently visited the ship about 7 p.m. he found the shoot down No. 4 hatch, but the loading at a standstill, having been suspended while the ballast was being pumped out. He found the master in the engine room with the chief engineer, and on enquiring when the ship would be ready for sea was told by the master that he could not say definitely, as loading could not be resumed until the ballast was pumped out. He instructed the pilot to return about 9 p.m. with a tug, and if he was required before that hour he would blow for him. The pilot accordingly returned with the tug at the time named, and was told by the master to hang on for a few minutes until the decks were cleared up. Ho stated that the vessel then had a list of about 3 degrees to port; he did not take her draught but was paid on 18 feet. Soon after, the mate reported "All battened down," and the vessel, which was at the time moored, was towed off the quay between 9.15 and 9.30, arriving safely in the locks at 9.45. The assistant dock-master, Mr. James William Robson, boarded the vessel when in the lock-pit prior to her sailing, but had no conversation with the master or officers. He noticed that she had a list of 3 to 5 degrees to port, and he verified the draught, 18 feet aft, which had been reported to him by the foreman. He noticed that all the hatches were on and that the lashings were on the main hatch but not on the after hatch, and the pilot stated he noticed that the covers were on but could not say if they were lashed. Between 9.45 and 10 p.m. the vessel left the lock and proceeded down the river, the master and pilot being on the bridge. The tide was strong, spring ebb, fresh wind W.N.W. to N.W., weather fine and clear but very dark. All went well, and soon after passing the Ball Lightship the mate reported "All cleared up." The pilot left the vessel in the neighbourhood of the Hailesand Buoy No. 1 between 11.20 and 11.30 p.m. He stated that everything appeared to be all right, that the engines and helm worked satisfactorily, and that at the Ball Lightship the vessel was practically upright. From this, the pilot assumed that the water had by that time been practically pumped out.

Since the pilot left nothing has been seen or heard of the vessel.

She was then under the command of Captain R. W. Milburn, who held a certificate of competency as master No. 008147. He had been some time in the service of the owners as chief officer, and was appointed master of the "Elsdon" on the 13th November, 1925, it being his first command, and this was his third voyage in that capacity. The owners had every confidence in Captain Milburn, and in their letter appointing him, after saying that they had decided to recommence trading with the "Elsdon" on the strength of representations that it was possible to run the ship without the services of a donkeyman and to employ a boy in place of mess room steward, without which economies the vessel would have to remain unemployed, they continue: "In appointing you master of the vessel we do so on the strong recommendation of Captain Hedley" (a former master of the "Elsdon" and now marine superintendent of the owners), "who assures us that we can rely upon your making every effort to work the vessel round safely, quickly and economically. The vessel is to be navigated at sea with the utmost prudence. The saving of time in sea passages, it must be understood, is a secondary consideration to the safety of the vessel."

The following is a list of the officers and crew supplied by the owners, the official log being lost in the vessel:-

On the 29th December at 10 a.m., a deeply immersed life-boat in which was the dead body of a man apparently about 40 years of age dressed in blue overalls and rubber boots, was picked up by a Danish fisherman drifting about 22 miles W.S.W. from the Thyboron Canal, Jutland, in lat. 56° 32' N., long. 7° 39' E. The fisherman towed the boat, which was subsequently found to hear the name "Elsdon," into Thyboron, but, in doing so, the body was washed out and sank immediately.

This was the first intimation that anything had happened to the "Elsdon." On the 8th January, 1926, the other life-boat was found off Torungen Light, on the S.E. coast of Norway. In the bottom of the boat lay an oar, boathook, bailer and rudder, and there were also two rowlocks and an old foresail, and the air tanks were in order. The boat was damaged along the gunwale and below the water line and leaked badly. The next clay a life-buoy marked "Elsdon" was picked up at Gröonningen at the entrance to the Christiansand Fjord; and on 11th or 14th January another life-buoy also marked "Elsdon " was found drifting in the sea on the east side of Skjernöo, an island a little to the east of Ryvingen Lighthouse. On 26th January, a quantity of unidentified wreckage, including a mast, was picked up off Karmöo, on the W.S.W. side of Norway.

As regards the weather likely to be experienced by the "Elsdon," Captain Arthur Charles Hall, master of the Wilson Line s.s. "Novo," a regular mail passenger and cargo steamer trading between Hull and Oslo, was called as a witness and stated he had had fifteen years' experience of the North Sea. The net tonnage of his vessel was 993 tons and her speed loaded 12 knots. He passed Immingham at 8.10 p.m. on the night of the 18th December. The wind being W.S.W., force 6, the vessel running before wind and sea. About midnight the wind went north, then north-east, with rough sea, reducing the speed to 10 knots through the water, the ship pitching and rolling heavily.

The same conditions obtained on the 19th, with occasional patches of fog and snow squalls, but moderated in the afternoon, and the vessel arrived at Christiansand at 9.40 a.m. of the 20th, two-and-a-half hours behind time owing to wind and sea.

Leaving Christiansand at noon of the 20th, the weather became worse, wind E.S.E., force 0 increasing to 8. Owing to fog and snow they had to take soundings, and they arrived at Oslo at 9.20 p.m. of the 21st, about 6 hours late. Though Captain Hall considered that the "Elsdon," which would be some-12 hours astern in crossing the North Sea, would get the worst of the weather, he did not think the weather was sufficient to account for her loss. Having regard to the positions in which the "Elsdon's " life-boats and buoys were subsequently found, and considering the weather he experienced, Captain Hall, with his intimate knowledge of the coast and currents, expressed the opinion that the vessel probably went ashore in the neighbourhood of Lodbierg, on the Jutland coast, and, not being seen in the fog, might have got off and foundered in deep water. He stated that in his experience in the North Sea very different types of weather may be encountered within a comparatively short distance.

Various reports of foreign masters were put in showing that the weather in the North Sea on the 19th and 20th December was very rough, with heavy cross-seas and occasional fog and snow storms.

Extracts were produced from official reports as to the weather conditions prevailing at Skudesnaes (Norway) and Hautsholm and Blaavands (Jutland) on the 19th, 20th and 21st December, and also from the Journals of the Outer Dowsing Light Vessel and the Humber Light Vessel for the 18th, 19th and 20th December.

These reports, so far as they were material, while not disclosing that the weather was exceptionally severe, were consistent with the evidence of Captain Hall and the statements of the foreign masters.

As regards the cause of the casualty, there were suggestions that it might possibly be due to collision or mines; hut the evidence furnished no grounds in support of these theories. While the Court was unable to come to any definite conclusion on the point in the absence of direct evidence, it considered that the most probable cause was, either that the vessel struck a point of land on the Jutland coast during fog and snow and afterwards sank in deep water, or took on hoard so much heavy water as to smash some of the hatch covers in the well-deck and admit such a quantity of water as to cause the vessel to founder. But the second alternative, unless the vessel met with some mishap to machinery or steering gear, was unlikely to happen if the hatchways and deck openings were properly and efficiently secured. The Court recognises that these large hatchways with wooden covers on the well-deck of small colliers are a possible source of danger, and is of opinion that no such vessel should be allowed to proceed to sea unless the hatchways are properly battened down and secured.

It was suggested on behalf of the Board of Trade that the hunker coal carried on top of the bunker hatch and any loose water in the ballast tanks may have contributed to the casualty. The Court?? however considered that the coal would, in a seaway, probably be washed overboard, and as according to the evidence of the pilot the vessel was practically upright and in good trim when he left her, the loose water, if any, would not have any prejudicial effect.

One of the foreign masters, in his letter to the owners describing the weather conditions he experienced in the North Sea, concludes as follows: "the self-trimmer lately seems to have had more than-their share of missings." The Court considers that the time is ripe for an exhaustive investigation into this type of vessel, the size of the hatches, and the best method for efficiently securing them, and that in this connection evidence should be obtained from ship masters and officers experienced in loading and handling vessels of this character in all conditions of weather.

The loss of life in this case is deplorable, but the owners appear to have kept the vessel in good and seaworthy condition and to have been solicitous for her safety and that of the officers and crew. In addition, at their own expense, they effected insurances upon the lives of the master and officers to inure for the benefit of their representatives, amounting, in the case of the master, to no less than £500, and in that of the other officers in varying proportions.

At the conclusion of the evidence the following questions were submitted on behalf of the Board of Trade, Mr. Temperley addressed the Court for his clients, and Mr. Burton replied:-

1. What was the cost of the s.s. "Elsdon" to her owners? What was her value when she last left Immingham? What insurances wore effected upon, or in connection with, the ship?

2. When the vessel left Immingham on the 18th December last-

3. Was the design of the "Elsdon" such as to ensure safety at sea with the freeboard assigned when laden with a homogeneous cargo?

4. Was the stability of the vessel, or of a sister vessel, completely investigated by the builders, and the knowledge thereof imparted to those responsible, so as to ensure safety under all probable conditions?

5. What was the angle of heel at which the righting forces vanished? Were the range and righting forces such as would ensure eafety when heavy seas were shipped?

6. Was the master supplied with such information regarding the vessel's stability as would enable him to load her so as to ensure seaworthiness?

7. What is the cause of the vessel not having been heard of since she left Immingham on the 18th December, 1925?

To which the Court replied as follows:-

1. The cost of the vessel to her owners was £24,375. They stated she stood in their books at the time of her loss at that amount, but that they estimated her market value at £18,000.

The insurances effected upon, and in connection with, the ship were as follows:-

2. When the vessel left Immingham on the 18th December last-

3. The design of the "Elsdon" was of good proportions and such as to ensure safety at sea with the freeboard assigned when laden with a homogeneous cargo.

4. The stability of the vessel, or of a sister vessel, was not investigated by the builders, and no knowledge on the subject was imparted to those responsible so as to ensure safety under all probable conditions.

5. Upon the svidence placed before the Court resulting from the inclining experiment recently performed upon the sister ship "Dilston" for the purpose of this Inquiry by an officer of the Board of Trade, it would appear that the angle of heel at which the righting forces vanished was 69 degrees. The Court is consequently of opinion that the range and righting forces were such as would ensure safety when heavy seas were shipped.

6. The master was supplied with no information regarding the vessel's stability.

7. The Court is of opinion that the casualty probably occurred, on or about the night of the 19th December last, on or near the coast of Jutland in the neighbourhood of Lodbierg. In the absence of direct evidence, the Court is unable to determine the exact cause of the casualty, but conjectures (1) that the vessel may have struck a point of land on the Jutland coast during the thick fog and snow storm which prevailed oft" that coast at the time, and afterwards sank in deep water; or (2) may have taken on board so much heavy water as to smash some of the hatch covers in the well-deck and admit such a quantity of water as to cause the vessel to founder. But, as the weather at the time was not exceptionally severe, the Court does not consider the second alternative likely to happen (in the absence of mishap to machinery or steering gear) unless some of the hatchways or deck openings were insufficiently secured. The Court is of opinion that these large hatchways with wooden covers in the well-deck of small colliers are a possible source of danger, and that a vessel of that class proceeding to sea without her hatches being first properly and efficiently battened down and secured is not seaworthy.

We concur.

(Issued by the Board of Trade in London

on Friday, the 3rd day of December. 1926.)

LONDON:

PUBLISHED BY HIS MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE.

To be purchased directly from H.M. STATIONERY OFFICE at the following addresses:

Adastral House, Kingsway, London, W.C. 2; 120, George Street, Edinburgh;

York Street, Manchester; 1, St. Andrew's Crescent, Cardiff;

15, Donegall Square West, Belfast;

or through any Bookseller.

1926.

Price 9d. Net.

Printed under the authority of HIS MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE

by Henderson & Spalding Ltd., Camberwell, London, S.E. 15.