"CADUCEUS," (S.S.)
REPORT of Inquiry into the circumstances attending an explosion which occurred
on board the steamship "CADUCEU," of London, on the 28th June 1878.
Report.
The Commissioner.—This is not an inquiry into a shipping casualty under the
provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act of 1876, but a proceeding under the 14th
article of the Act of 1854.
The words of the statute are as follows: " The Board of " Trade may from time to
time, whenever it seems expe- " dient to them so to do, appoint any person as an
inspector " to report to them upon the following matters; that is to " say, (1)
upon the nature and causes of any accident or " damage which any ship has
sustained or caused, or is "alleged to have sustained or caused." And the Board
of Trade having appointed me inspector, I have come down to hold an inquiry into
the circumstances of this case; at the same time, after having heard the
evidence, I entertain great doubt whether I have any jurisdiction at all to
entertain the case.
It is obvious that it cannot be every kind of accident or damage in which the
Board of Trade may order an inquiry under the provisions of the 14th section, as
for instance a railway accident; but it must be an accident or damage "which any
ship has sustained or caused, or is alleged to have sustained or caused." On my
calling Mr. Waldon's attention to this point in the early part of these
proceedings, he stated that he took upon himself to " allege " that in this case
an accident or damage had been sustained, and that thus my jurisdiction was
founded. It came out, however, in the course of the inquiry that the ship had
not sustained any damage at all by the explosion, and I therefore have great
doubt whether I have any jurisdiction at all in the matter. A mere allegation,
which is afterwards distinctly disproved, that the vessel had sustained some
damage, is in my opinion insufficient to found the jurisdiction of the Court.
Had the vessel been seriously or materially damaged, or had any of the five men,
who have been so seriously injured, died, my jurisdiction to hold the inquiry as
Wreck Commissioner would have been undoubted; and in that case, if it had been
shown that the accident had arisen from the neglect or misconduct of the master
of the vessel or of any certificated officer, the Court would have had full
jurisdiction to entertain the case, and to deal with the officer's certificate.
But the fact that the vessel was not seriously damaged, and that the men,
although seriously injured, perhaps crippled for life, have not actually died,
seems to oust the Court's jurisdiction. However the objection, although taken,
was not insisted upon by Mr. Ingledew, who appeared for the ship owners and the
owners of the colliery from which the coals came, probably because they have as
deep if not a deeper interest in the inquiry than anyone; and I will therefore
proceed to state the conclusions to which I have come upon the evidence as it
has been laid before us.
The "Caduceus" is a screw steamship of 1,844 tons gross and 1,179 tons net
register, and is fitted with two engines of 150 horse-power combined. She is the
property of Mr. John Hall, of Newcastle-on-Tyne, and others, Mr. John Hall being
the principal and the managing owner. She had recently brought a cargo of grain
from the Black Sea, and having discharged it at Antwerp, proceeded to Cardiff,
there to take on board a cargo of coals for Aden. She arrived at Cardiff on the
24th of June, and the same afternoon began to take in her coals. By the morning
of the 28th she had taken on board about 2,180 tons of coal, her full cargo
being about 2,225 tons. It would seem that the captain was somewhat dissatisfied
with the quantity of coals that she had taken in; he accordingly made some
remarks (I will not say gave orders), but he communicated his dissatisfaction to
the foreman of the coal trimmers, stating that in his opinion a larger quantity
of coal might have been put into the forehold. Shortly afterwards the vessel,
which had been taking coals into the main hold, was shifted so as to bring the
hatch of the forehold under the Spout, and the foreman trimmer (Mr. Hearne),
went down for the purpose of seeing whether or not an additional quantity of
coal could be put into the forehold.
The vessel had only two decks, and in the lower forehold had been put about 400
tons of coal, which, according to one of the witnesses, had been trimmed so as
to be within about 18 inches of the under side of the lower deck, and then a
quantity of coals had been filled into the lower hatch so as to bring it about
half-way up the combings. There were no coals in the 'tween decks of the
forehold. In order, therefore, to get down into the lower hold Mr. Hearne had to
clear a way through the coals in the lower hatch; and having done so, he went
down feet foremost into the empty space under the lower deck. Whether Hearne did
or did not ask for a light appears to me not to. be a matter of much importance;
it is quite clear, however, that one of the other trimmers, who had gone into
the 'tween decks with him, and was standing immediately over the hatch, down
which Hearne had gone, struck a light, with the object evidently of lighting a
candle, and of handing it down to Hearne. He had, however, hardly done so when
an explosion took place, resulting, as I have said, in serious injury to five of
the men, who were below, but apparently without any material damage to the ship
herself.
Now the question which I have to consider is, what was the cause of this
explosion? and I think that we can have little difficulty in arriving at a
satisfactory conclusion upon that point. The coals shipped on board this vessel
came from the Ferndale Collieries, in the Little Rhondda Valley, belonging to
Messrs. David Davis and Sons. They are a semi anthracite coal, and are commonly
known as the South Wales smokeless coal. Having so recently in the case of the
"Sardinian" examined carefully into the nature and property of these coals, I
need only observe that, admirably adapted as they are for steam purposes, they
do, especially when newly wrought from the pit, give off large quantities of
carburetted hydrogen, which, if mixed with atmospheric air in the proportions of
1 of gas to between 6 and 16 of atmospheric air, produces a most explosive
compound. It is therefore a matter of the very greatest importance, when these
coals are being put on board vessels, and indeed for some time afterwards, that
every facility should be given for allowing the gas, which is considerably
lighter than air, to escape readily.
That the owners of the collieries were aware of this property in their coals is
evident from the printed notice which it appears that they are in the habit of
giving to the captains of all vessels who take their coals, the concluding
paragraph of which is in these words: "We particularly caution you to keep the
hatches, &c. open for a few " days after the completion of the loading, in order
to " allow the escape of any explosive gas that may be given " out by the coal.
No flame must be permitted." (These words are in large letters.) "No flame must
be permitted " in the hold, or any other part of the vessel where gas " may
collect, until perfect ventilation has been established " throughout." There is
also a byelaw of the Penarth Dock Company in these words: "The hatchways of
every " vessel laden with coal must be left open during the whole " of the time
that such vessel stays in the dock, basin, " or harbour, and must not be closed
until such vessel has " passed through the sea gates or from the harbour on "
her way to the channel. The master of any vessel which " shall be found to have
her hatchways closed contrary to " this regulation shall be liable to a penalty
not exceed" " ing 5l."
And first let me observe that as regards the owners of the colliery, Messrs.
Davis and Sons, I cannot see that any imputation rests upon them. They seem to
have issued the notice to which I have just called attention, and a very proper
notice it is: and if the captains of vessels which take in their coal were to
pay to it the attention which it deserves, these explosions would seldom,
perhaps never, occur. But it would seem from the evidence that has been given in
this case, that shipmasters and others engaged in shipping these coals, either
from ignorance or carelessness, pay little, if any, attention to such notices.
And now let us see what precautions did the shipowner, who knew that she was
about to take in above 2,000 tons of coal, take in order to secure proper
ventilation of the holds of this vessel. Literally, I should say, none. It was
said by Mr. Lowrie, the superintendent of Mr. Hall's vessels, that there are
holes cut along each side of the lower deck, 3 feet 8 inches long by 14 inches
wide, of which there were certainly four in the forehold, and which were
intended to give ventilation to the lower hold. But I think that everyone who
has heard the evidence must have seen clearly that these slits or holes in the
lower deck were intended not for the purposes of ventilation, but with a view to
the carriage of grain cargoes, and so as to allow the grain in the 'tween decks
to find its way readily into the lower hold, and thus fill up the empty space
which is always left by the settling of the cargo where no such precautions are
taken. It is needless to say that the great danger to grain-carrying ships is
from the shifting of the cargo. As long, however, as the lower hold is kept
quite full, there is no chance of the cargo shifting; and that, no doubt, was
the object of these holes or slits in the lower deck, and certainly not for the
purpose of ventilation. Indeed, we were told that in the after and main holds
there was coal in the 'tween decks, and as it is admitted that there was no
ventilation from the 'tween decks, it is not easy to see how these holes or
slits in the lower deck could have served as ventilators to the cargo.
But let us now proceed to inquire what was the quantity and what the state of
the coal which was put into the lower forehold.
We were told by Mr. Lowrie that the lower forehold would hold, when quite full,
from 470 to 480 tons of coal, but that he seldom put in more than 440 tons. We
have it, too, from Mr. Strawson, a clerk in the employ of Messrs. Davis and
Sons, and who on this occasion had charge of the loading of the "Caduceus," that
between 8 p.m. of the 26th and 6 a.m. of the 27th, about 400 tons of coal had
been put into the lower forehold, and that all this coal had left the collieries
on the 25th and 26th, about 300 tons of it on the 26th. And as we were told that
the coal is generally sent from the colliery on the day on which it is worked,
all this coal may be said to have been freshly worked coal, and in a condition
to give off large quantities of gas or carburetted hydrogen. This freshly worked
coal then had been left in the lower forehold from 6 a.m. of the 27th to between
10 and 11 a.m. of the 28th, or for more than 28 hours, giving off gas in large
quantities. And how is it supposed that this gas would escape?
A plan has been given in, showing the construction of the vessel in the way of
the forehold. From this it would seem that there were in this part four of these
holes or slits of which I have spoken, one on each side of the hatch, and the
other two a good deal further aft; but there was no ventilator, hole, or
aperture forward of the forehatch, but over the fore part in the 'tween decks
were the petty officers' quarters and the seamens' berths. We know that the]
lower forehatch was quite filled up with coal half-way up the combings; whether
the four slits in the lower deck, two of which were on a level with, and two far
abaft the hatch, were open, we are not clear, but this is certain, that forward
of the forehatch there was no possible means for the gas to escape. Owing, too,
to the sheer of the ship forward, any gas which might be given off by the coal
would necessarily be confined, at all events, in the space forward of the hatch.
Mr. Lowrie said that the forehatches were not on at the time of the explosion,
and that where water could get down, gas could get up. I confess that I was
somewhat surprised at this remark, and at the ignorance which it seemed to show
of the dangerous character of these gases. To suppose that there had been a
compliance with the notice of Mr. Davis, and with the directions of the Penarth
Dock Company, when the lower hatch was filled with coal half-way up the
combines, merely because the hatches had not been put on and battened down,
appears 'to me to be very strange on the part of a gentleman, who seems to have
the superintendence of all Mr. Hall's ships. That there was very little
opportunity for the gas to escape up the hatch is clear from the evidence of a
man who, as Mr. Ingledew has said, has given very good evidence, and who seems
to be a very intelligent man. He told us that so securely closed was the lower
forehatch by the coal that was in it, that when the explosion took place the
flame found its way out, not through the hatchway, but through the slits or
holes much further aft.
There can, I think, be no question as to what caused the explosion in this case.
Four hundred tons of freshly wrought coal are put into the lower forehold, and
there allowed to remain closed up for about 28 hours; at the end of that time
the foreman coal trimmer opens a way through the closely sealed hatch into the
empty space above the coal, where the gas would naturally have accumulated,
there being no means afforded for its escape. A light is struck, the gas catches
fire, and an explosion necessarily takes place. There could be no other result,
and the only wonder is, that those who were employed in the work should not have
anticipated it. Had there been, as there should have been, a ventilator in the
fore part of the lower hold passing through, as it might easily have done, the
seamen's and firemen's berths, and up through the deck above, and another
ventilator at the other end, with the coals properly adjusted, there can be
little doubt that this accident would never have occurred. The gas, which is so
much lighter than the air, would have found its way naturally through the
ventilator and escaped.
I cannot but think that this inquiry may be of some use if it results in showing
to such gentlemen as Mr. Lowrie and others, who have been for so many years
engaged in loading vessels with coal, that there are dangers attending the
loading of ships with coal which it would be very desirable that both he and his
owner, Mr. John Hall, should endeavour as far as possible to avoid in future;
and that the arrangements on board such a vessel as the "Caduceus," however well
adapted for the carriage of grain cargoes, are not the only means proper to be
taken for the surface ventilation of cargoes of South Wales smokeless coal.
Of course, as there is a doubt about my jurisdiction, even if I had been asked
to do so, I should have had great difficulty in giving any costs in this case;
but no such application is made by either party.
(Signed)H. C. ROTHERY,
Wreck Commissioner and Inspector.
W. 340. 60.—8/78. Wt. 35.
