(No. 892.)
"LENORE" and S.S. "JOHN DIXON."
The Merchant Shipping Acts, 1854 to 1876.
IN the matter of a formal Investigation held at the Town Hall, North Shields, on the 4th, 5th, and 7th days of February 1881, before JOSEPH GREEN and GEORGE CLEUGH, Esquires, assisted by Captains WHITE, R.N., CLARKE, and ANDERSON, into the circumstances attending the loss of the "LENORE" through collision with the S.S. "JOHN DIXON," on the 14th of January 1881.
Report of Court.
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 "Lenore" and eight of her crew, including the master, was occasioned by the S.S. "John Dixon" striking the "Lenore" on her starboard side on the evening of the 14th of January 1881, and the Court further finds that both vessels were more or less in default, and suspends the certificate of Alexander Tate, the master of the S.S. "John Dixon" for a period of six calendar months from the date hereof.
Dated this 8th day of February 1881.
(Signed)
Jos. GREEN,
Justices.
G. CLEUGH,
We concur in the above report.
(Signed)
E. A. WHITE, R.N.,
R. F. CLARKE,
Assessors.
ABSM. ANDERSON,
Annex to the Report.
The "Lenore" was a ship of 1236.52 registered tonnage, built of wood at Miramichi, New Brunswick, in 1865, and owned by Henry Latham and others, Robert Hadden, of Liverpool, being appointed manager in 1879. From the evidence it appears she left the River Tyne on the 14th of January 1881, in charge of a sea pilot, and having on board a north sea pilot with a cargo of coal bound for Bombay. She had a crew of 22 hands all told, and was under the command of Mr. James Bailie, who held a master's certificate, No. 82,448. She was provided with four boats, and was drawing 22 feet forward and 22 feet 8 inches aft.
The "John Dixon" is an iron screw steamer of 130 nominal horse-power, her registered tonnage being 977.44. She was built at Wallsend in the River Tyne in 1872, and is the property of Henry Corfield Bucknall and others, he being appointed managing owner on the 20th of July 1876. From the evidence it appears she left Huelva on the 7th of January 1881, with a crew of 25 hands all told, under the command of Mr. Alexander Tate, who holds a certificate of competency, No. 15,396, with a cargo of copper pyrites and esparto grass bound for the Tyne. She was provided with four boats and the usual life-saving apparatus.
The "Lenore" was towed out to sea by a steam tug, which left her with an offing of about two miles from the Tyne pier heads, the sea pilot leaving in the tug at 4.30 p.m. The North Sea pilot then set the course S.S.E., and the ship then proceeded on this course under topsails, topgallant sails, and foresail; the tide was then setting to the southward. with a light breeze from the N.W., inclined to freshen, weather hazy. Nothing of importance occurred until about 6 pm., when a light was reported on the starboard bow. The master was in charge of the deck. No shore or other lights had been seen or reported, although the crew stated that they could see the light on the starboard bow at a distance of from one to three miles. There was a look-out on the top-gallant forecastle, and upon this man reporting the light, the chief mate immediately went forward, and upon seeing the light also reported it to the master, who was heard to sing out "Ay, ay." It would appear from the evidence that shortly after six o'clock that the crew of the "Lenore" made out the light to be that of a steamer bearing down upon them, and all hands began to shout "Stop her, back her," which we consider would be perfectly useless at a distance of two miles. Instead of this, they should have made use of the fog horns which they had on board. The ship was kept on her course, and sail was not shortened. Shortly after this the collision took place, cutting the ship on her starboard side to within two planks of her after-hatch-combings, there being at this time, according to the statements of the crew of the "Lenore," a frosty haze upon the water, the stars visible overhead. The lights of the "Lenore" were burning brightly both before and at the time of the collision, and in their proper position. Immediately the collision took place, the master ordered the boats to be got out, and they succeeded in launching the gig, in which twelve hands were saved; two were picked up from floating wreckage, and one apprentice jumped on board the colliding steamer. The remainder of the crew, including the master, were unfortunately drowned. The "John Dixon" was abeam of the Whitby lighthouses at 2.30 p.m., distant 4 miles, when she set her log, and proceeded on a N.W. by N. course (by compass) and at full speed. The weather during this time was slightly hazy, and at 5.45 p.m. the haze became more dense, and the master, who was on the bridge, eased the engines to half speed, and sounded the fog-whistle immediately, continuing to do that at regular intervals up to the time of the collision, and also afterwards. At 6.15 p.m. the captain altered the course to N.N.W. by compass, the weather being still thick, and he was on that course at half speed, going about five knots per hour, when the second officer, who was also on the bridge, reported a green light about three-fourths of a point on the port bow, and about three ships' lengths off. The second mate ordered the helm starboard, the master ordered it hard-a-starboard, and went to the telegraph, and finding that she was not answering her starboard helm quickly enough, some two minutes after the light was reported, the captain ordered the engines to be stopped and reversed full speed. In the Court's opinion the collission would, in all probability, have been averted had the steamer gone full speed astern immediately the light was reported, and which it was in his power to do. About 6.35 p.m. the "John Dixon" struck the "Lenore" on the starboard side, abaft the main rigging, and cutting into her deck up to within two planks of the after-hatch-combings, the steamers bows being damaged to such an extent as to fill the fore compartment with water. It appears from this evidence, therefore, that the weather must have been thick. The effect of the steamer's engines going astern separated the vessels at once, although the captain stopped immediately the collision occurred. Two of the "John Dixon's" boats were promptly got out (the sea being also at this time smooth), and arrived at the "Lenore" as she was fast settling down (being about five minutes after the collision), and were compelled to pull a short distance off to prevent being drawn down by the sinking vessel. The boats remained about the scene of the disaster for some time, ultimately being recalled by the blowing of the steamer's whistle. Whilst cruising about they picked up the men in the "Lenore's" gig, and two hands floating in the water, but could see no other bodies swimming about, or on any wreckage. The men were then taken on board the "John Dixon," and on the captain asking the chief mate of the "Lenore" if anything else could be done, the chief mate replied that he thought everything had been done that could be done, and the captain, knowing that the bows of his vessel were severely damaged, and being apprehensive of danger to his own ships' crew, and thinking nothing more could be done to save life, proceeded towards the Tyne at an easy speed. The master, on his arrival in the Tyne, on the following day, reported the circumstances to the collector of Customs, and also made an entry in the official log, which was put in in evidence; it was signed by the master and the mate, but there was an important interlineation which was initiated only by the master.
At the conclusion of the evidence the following questions were submitted to the Court:—
The opinion of the Court is requested on the following points by the Board of Trade:—
1. At what distance was the "John Dixon" first seen by the crew of the "Lenore," and at what distance was the "Lenore" first seen by the crew of the "John Dixon?"
2. What was the state of the weather at 5.50 p.m. of the 14th of January, and at the time of the collision?
3. If the weather was thick, did both or either of the vessels proceed at a moderate speed and otherwise conform to the 13th Article of the Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea?
4. If the weather was thick, did both or either of the vessels duly conform with Article 12 of the said Regulations?
5. Did the "John Dixon" duly conform with Article 18 of the said Regulations?
6. Were the requirements of Article 16 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1873, duly complied with, and was every possible effort made by the master of the "John Dixon" to save the lives of the crew of the "Lenore?"
7. Were both vessels navigated with proper and seamanlike care, and with due regard had to the regulations for preventing collisions?
8. Which of the two vessels is, or are both, or is neither of them to blame for the collision?
Having regard to the above questions, was the collision and the loss of life caused thereby occasioned by any wrongful acts or defaults either of the chief officer of the "Lenore" or of the master of the "John Dixon," the Board of Trade is of opinion that the certificate of Alexander Tate, the master of the "John Dixon" should be dealt with.
HOWARD SMITH, For the Board of Trade.
Judgment.
1. According to the evidence of the officer and crew of the "Lenore," the "John Dixon" was seen at a distance of from one and a half to three miles off, and by the evidence of the officers and crew of the "John Dixon," the "Lenore" was seen at a distance of from three to four ships' lengths. The Court is of ?? that the statements of the officers and crew ?? "John Dixon" are correct.
2. The Court is of opinion that a fog or haze e??
3. The master of the "John Dixon" took t?? cautions of going at half speed and sounding his?? whistle, yet, in the judgment of the Court, the ?? should have been further slowed, considering the?? ment of the master as to the condition of the we?? and also having regard to the quantity of cra?? might have been in that neighbourhood. The C?? also of opinion that it would have been more for the "Lenore" to have shortened sail.
4. The "John Dixon" did comply with Artic?? the Regulations provided for preventing colli?? sea, and the "Lenore," though provided with?? horns, did not make use of them.
5. Considering the nearness of the "Lenore" ?? "John Dixon" when first seen by the latte?? engines should have been reversed immediately.
6. The Court is of opinion that it would have ?? more satisfactory if the "John Dixon" had rem?? little longer in the vicinity of the wreck before p?? ing on her course, although it is due to the capt?? officers of the steamer to say that the survivors ?? "Lenore" expressed themselves satisfied that ?? been done that could be done towards saving life,
7 and 8. Neither of the vessels were navigate?? proper and seamanlike care to the extent indic?? previous answers, and both vessels were more or?? blame for the collision.
With regard to the chief officer of the "Lenor?? Court expresses no opinion, as he was not in ch?? the vessel. The master who was in charge at the?? of the collision was unfortunately drowned.
With regard to Alexander Tate, the master ?? "John Dixon," the Court finds him in defa?? suspends his certificate for a period of six ?? months from the date hereof.
The Court makes no order as to costs.
(Signed)
JOS. GREEN,
Justices.
G. CLEUGH,
We concur in above judgment.
(Signed)
E. A. WHITE, R.N.,
R. F. CLARKE,
Assessors.
ABSM. ANDERSON,
L 367. 662. 200.—2/81. Wt. 47. E. & S.
