(No. 334.)
"FOAM."
The Merchant Shipping Acts, 1854 to 1876.
IN the matter of the formal Investigation held at the Sessions Court, Guildhall, Plymouth, on the 15th of July 1879, before H. C. ROTHERY, Esquire, Wreck Commissioner, assisted by Captain HOLT, I.N., and Captain SCEALES, as Assessors, into the circumstances attending the stranding of the sailing ship "FOAM," of Plymouth, on the rocks on Labicur Beach, near the entrance to Falmouth Harbour, on the 1st of July 1879, whereby the said ship and two of her crew were lost.
Report of Court.
The Court, having carefully inquired into the circumstances of the above-mentioned shipping casualty, found, for the reasons stated in the annex hereto,-
1. That the stranding of the said vessel was due to the master having made no allowance for the wind and tide, which were setting the vessel to the northward, after passing the Eddystone Lighthouse, and until she grounded.
2. That the vessel when she left Plymouth was well found, and that her compasses were in good and proper order.
3. That except for a short time after leaving Plymouth Sound, when a W. by S. course was steered, we have no reason to think that the W.S.W. course, stated to have been steered, was not steered.
4. That proper allowance was not made for the set of the tide to the north.
5. That the master no doubt verified his position when off the Eddystone, but that he took no steps whatever afterwards to ascertain his true position.
6. That the neglect to use the lead was, under the circumstances, unjustifiable.
7. That although no one was set specially to look out after about 10.30 p.m., we have no reason to think that a good look-out was not being kept by the master and mate.
8. That the vessel was not navigated with proper and seamanlike care.
9. That after the vessel grounded all that it was possible for them to do was done with a view to the preservation of the lives of those on Board.
10. That the blame of the casualty rests with the master alone, who had the entire control of the navigation of the vessel, and was at the helm for the greater part of the time, from 10.30 p.m. to about 2 a.m. when she grounded.
For these wrongful acts and defaults the Court ordered the certificate of William Furze Ball, the master of the "Foam," to be suspended for six months from the 15th instant, but with a recommendation that during the period of the suspension he be allowed a first mate's certificate.
The Court made no order as to costs.
Dated the 23rd day of July 1879.
(Signed)
H. C. ROTHERY,
Wreck Commissioner.
We concur in the above report.
(Signed)
G. TREFUSIS HOLT, I.N.,
Assessors.
"
J. SCEALES,
Annex to the Report.
This case came before the Court on the 15th July instant, when Mr. Wolferstan appeared for the Board of Trade, Mr. Loye for the owner, and Mr. Elliott Square for the master and mate of the "Foam." Five witnesses having been examined, Mr. Wolferstan, on behalf of the Board of Trade, asked for the opinion of the Court upon the following questions:-
" 1. What was the cause of the stranding of the vessel?
" 2. Whether when she left Plymouth she was well " found, and whether her compasses were in good and " proper order ?
" 3. Whether the W.S.W. course stated to have been " steered was steered, and whether the vessel at any time " broke off from that course?
" 4. Whether proper allowance was made for currents?
" 5. Whether the master verified his position when the " Eddystone was sighted, and whether he took other " proper measures to do so ?
" 6. Whether the total neglect of the lead was justi- " fiable?
" 7. Whether a good and proper look-out was kept?
" 8. Whether the vessel was navigated with proper and " seamanlike care ?
" 9. Whether when the vessel was ashore proper mea- " sures were taken with a view to the preservation of the " lives of the crew?
" 10. Whether the master and the mate are or either of " them is in default?"
Mr. Wolferstan also asked that " the certificate of the master should be dealt with."
Mr. Loye then produced the owner as a witness, and the respective parties having been heard, the Court proceeded to give judgment on the questions that had been submitted for its consideration. The circumstances of the case are as follow:-
The "Foam" was a sailing vessel of 211 tons net register, belonging to Plymouth, and was the property of Mr. William Jenkins, of that town. She left Porto Rico on the 3rd of May last with a cargo of from 215 to 220 tons of sugar bound to Plymouth for orders. She arrived at Plymouth on the 9th June following, and was obliged at once to discharge her crew, the time mentioned in the articles having expired. There she remained until on or about the 21st, when she received orders to proceed with her cargo to Marseilles, and a fresh crew having been engaged, she left Plymouth on the 30th ultimo with a crew of eight hands all told, consisting of a master, a mate, a steward, one able seaman, three ordinary seamen, and an apprentice. After clearing the breakwater she was laid on a W. by S. course, close-hauled on the port tack, the wind being from about S.S.W. and the weather fine. As she proceeded the wind gradually came away more from the southward, so that she was able to keep a W.S.W. course, which was the course that the captain told us he intended to make in order to clear the Lizard. At 8 o'clock p.m. the Eddystone Lighthouse bore E.S.E., distant about six miles, the vessel at that time being under all plain sail. At about 8.30 the wind began to freshen, and thereupon all the light sails were taken in. At 10.30 the foresail was blown away, upon which all the hands were called up, and more sail was taken off. She was continued on her course, heading about W.S.W. until about 1 o'clock, when all hands went below to change their clothes and rest, whilst the master and mate alone remained on deck, the master being at the helm, the mate on the quarter deck looking out. At about a quarter to two the mate and the master suddenly observed land at a short distance off close under the lee bow, upon which the helm was put hard down for the purpose of going about, and all hands were at once called up. The vessel, however, missed stays, and thereupon an attempt was made to wear her, but when half round she touched the ground and remained fast. It was then blowing a hard gale from the southward, and the vessel having fallen off broadside to the sea soon began to break up. The mate and two of the hands succeeded in swimming to the shore, and as the tide fell, it having been high water when she grounded, the master and two more of the hands succeeded in getting on to the rocks; but the other two hands were unfortunately lost. They remained on the rocks at the foot of the cliff until the morning, when the survivors, six in number, were hauled to the top by means of ropes. The vessel herself, however, went to pieces, and was lost together with the cargo and everything on board. The place where the vessel struck is stated to have been a little to the east of the entrance to Falmouth Harbour, between St. Anthony's Point, or more properly speaking Zoze Point, and Killygerran or Porthmellin Head.
Now one of the questions upon which the opinion of the Court was asked, and which it may be well to answer first is, whether, when the vessel left Plymouth she was well and sufficiently found, and whether her compasses were in good and proper order ? It is a question which ultimately concerns the owner, seeing that he resides at Plymouth, and that he must have had many opportunities of seeing her before she left for Marseilles, the vessel having been lying in this harbour from the 9th to the 30th ultimo. It appears to us, however, that, so far as relates to her condition, she was fairly found for a vessel of her class; she had a new main sail and topsail supplied to her whilst she lay at Plymouth, and it does not appear that the casualty was due to any deficiency in her equipments. She had eight hands in all, which in the opinion of the assessors was a sufficient complement for a vessel of her size; and although almost all the seamen were very young and inexperienced, it does not appear that this circumstance in any way contributed 'to the casualty. As regards her compasses it seems that they were sent ashore to be repaired whilst she lay at Plymouth; it does not seem that they' were very seriously damaged, the total cost of the repairs to the three compasses being only 7s. 6d.; and Mr. Smith, the compass adjuster, who was examined before us, stated that they were in good working order when he returned them on board. There was therefore nothing, so far as we could see, in the state and condition either of the vessel or of her compasses for which the owner could be blamed.
Seeing, however, the circumstances under which the vessel was lost, so soon after leaving port, and that when the land was first seen the master and mate were the only persons on deck, it appeared to us advisable that we should have some information as to how the vessel stood in respect of insurances and mortgages. From the evidence of Mr. Jenkins, the owner, it appears that she was originally built' for him in the year 1866 at a cost of 3,000l., and that at the time of her loss she was insured in the Plymouth Clubs for 1,000l., and at Lloyd's for 600l., or for. 1,600l. in all. Now undoubtedly 1,600l. is, as Mr. Jenkins 'admitted, a considerable sum for which to insure a wooden vessel 12 years old, even although she was originally built of oak and pitch pine, his own estimate of her value being only 1,4001. On the other hand, he told us that the freight and outfit were only insured for 3001., although the gross freight alone, on which there had been no advance, was 600l., in addition to the outfit, which he computed at 150l., leaving, as he observed, 450l. of the freight uninsured. The owner also stated that the vessel was not mortgaged. We thought it proper to inquire into all these circumstances, but it appears to us that there is nothing in these facts to show that the owner had any interest in not continuing the voyage, or that the loss of the vessel would have been any advantage to him. So far, therefore, as the owner is concerned no blame appears to attach to him for this casualty.
The next question which we have to consider is, how came this vessel to be lost, and what was the cause of the stranding? We are told that on leaving Plymouth Sound she passed out to the west of the breakwater, and was at first kept on a W. by S. course, close-hauled to the wind on the port tack the wind being from the S.S.W., and undoubtedly such a course would not have been a safe or proper one for clearing the Lizard. The wind, however, having got more 'to the southward, we are told that her head was laid W.S.W,. and that at 8 p.m. the Eddystone Lighthouse bore E.S.E., distant about six miles, and from that time her course was W.S.W. Now no doubt if a W.S.W. course had been not steered, but made good from off the Eddystone, it would have taken the vessel some eight or nine miles clear of the Lizard, which is the distance at which the master said that he expected to pass it. It is clear, therefore, that the master supposed that by steering a W.S.W. course he would make that course good, and that he made no allowance whatever either for the set of the tide or for leeway. It will, therefore, be important to see in what direction the tide would be setting the vessel from about 8 p.m., when she had the Eddystone Lighthouse bearing E.S.E., distant about six miles, and which the master called his point of departure.
According to the master it was high water at Plymouth at about 2 a.m. of the 1st instant; from 8 p.m. then of the 30th June, when the vessel was off the Eddystone until she went ashore, the tide was flowing on the shore. Now in Part I. of the Channel Pilot, which deals with the southwest and south coasts of England, we find it stated at page 61, that abreast of Plymouth Sound, and about six miles from the land, the direction of the tide during the first three hours of flood on the shore, is "W.N.W. to N.W., when it begins to slacken and set about north," until at the last it runs about E. by S., and that the maximum velocity does not exceed '1 1/2 knots. Further on it says that four miles S.W. of the Eddystone the stream "during the first " two hours flood on the shore sets N.W. by W., and " loses its strength during the third hour, running N.W. " and north;" and that "during the fourth hour, what " little stream there is sets N.N.E. and N.E., and then " E.N.E. and E. by N., till about high water, when its " direction is E. by S." It is, therefore, quite clear that from about 8 o'clock until the vessel went ashore the flood tide was continually setting her to the northward and leeward of her course, and therefore towards the shore. During the whole of this time .also the wind was blowing strong from the south, and having at least from half-past ten only a small quantity of canvas set she would be making a good deal of leeway. Now I have already stated that with the Eddystone Lighthouse bearing E.S.E., distant six miles, a W.S.W. course would, if made good, have taken her some eight or nine miles from the Lizard; such a course would also, if made good, have taken her some 14 miles from the place where she went on shore. But during all this time she had the tide, which was approaching the springs, when we are told it has a maximum of 1 1/2 knots an hour, as well as the wind, setting her to the northward; and allowing something under 1 knot an hour for the tide, and something over a knot an hour for lee way, we can well understand how the vessel could during those six hours from 8 p.m. to 2 a.m., have got some 14 miles to leeward of her course. This, in our opinion, would be quite sufficient to account for the vessel having gone ashore where she did, even assuming that she was steered all the time on a W.S.W. course, and without its being necessary to suppose that her compasses were in error, or that she was allowed to fall off her course.
This being so, it remains to be considered who is to blame for the casualty. It seems that it was the master's watch from eight to twelve that night, and we have been told that from 8 p.m. until she struck the master was continually on deck directing the navigation of the vessel, he himself being at the helm for the most part from 10.30 p.m., whilst the crew were engaged in taking in canvas. If anyone, therefore, was to blame for this casualty it was the master, and the master alone. Now we have no reason to suppose that he did not keep the vessel as he has stated on a W.S.W. course; but his fault was in making no allowance either for the set of the tide or for lee way. Whilst, too, there is no evidence to show that the master did not ascertain his true position when off the Eddystone, it appears to us that it matters very little whether he did estimate his distance correctly or not, whether in fact he was four or six miles from the Eddystone, for by keeping a W.S.W. course, without making any allowance for tide or leeway, the vessel must necessarily have gone ashore, in the then state of the wind and tide, somewhere to the eastward of the Lizard, though probably not at the place where she did. The conduct, too, of the master in not taking a cast of the lead was in our opinion quite unjustifiable. From 8 o'clock, when the Eddystone was lost sight of, no lights or land were seen; during all this time the master should have known that both the wind and tide were setting him towards the shore, and vet he took no steps whatever to ascertain his true position, and never once took a cast of the lead. As regards the look-out, it does not appear that after half-past ten any person was set regularly on the look-out, but it does not appear that this in any way contributed to the casualty, for the master and mate told us that they discovered the land as soon as it could be seen, but that it was then impossible to work the ship off the shore, the weather being so thick with rain that the land could not be seen until they were close upon it, but this only shows the greater necessity for taking a cast of the lead, the position of the vessel being uncertain, and with the knowledge, if the master thought at all about it, that they were drifting towards the coast. In answer, therefore, to the eighth question, we can only say that in our opinion the vessel was not navigated with proper or seamanlike care. On the other hand, we are of opinion that once the vessel was ashore we do not see that the master could have done anything more than he did, or that the loss of the two lives was attributable to any misconduct on his part subsequently to the stranding of the vessel.
Under ali the circumstances of the case, considering that the loss of this vessel and her very valuable cargo, together with two of the crew, is due to the negligence and recklessness of the master in steering a course which with the set of the wiud and tide must necessarily, if he had thought of it, have taken the vessel ashore, and that he neglected, although quite ignorant of the ship's position, and without having seen any light or land to guide him, to take a cast of the lead, the Court was of opinion that it would not be doing its duty if it did not suspend his certificate for six months, and it accordingly did so, stating at the same time that it would recommend that he should, in accordance with the application made by his advocate on his behalf, be allowed a chief mate's certificate during the period of the suspension of his master's certificate.
No application was made by any of the parties for costs, and none were therefore granted.
(Signed)
H. C. ROTHERY,
Wreck Commissioner.
We concur.
(Signed)
G. TREFUSIS HOLT, I.N.,
Assessors.
"
J. SCEALES,
(No. 448.)
L 367. 105. 70.-7/79. Wt. 47. E. & S.
