Wreck Report for 'Ashburne', 1881

(No. 1065.)

"ASHBURNE" (S.S.)

The Merchant Shipping Acts, 1854 to 1876.

IN the matter of a formal Investigation held at the County Buildings, Glasgow, on the 25th, 26th, 27th, and 28th days of July 1881, before WILLIAM STIRLING, Esquire, and DONALD MATHESON, Esquire, C.B., two of Her Majesty's Justices of the Peace for Lanarkshire, assisted by Captains HARRIS and WARD, Nautical Assessors, into the circumstances attending the stranding of the British steamship "ASHBURNE," of Sunderland.

Report of Court.

The Court, having carefully inquired into the circumstances attending the above-mentioned casualty, finds, for the reasons stated in the annex hereto, that a proper course was steered from the position ascertained at 6 p.m. of the 15th June last, and that that position was at that time correctly ascertained; that the master was not on deck at the time of the casualty, not having been called according to his instructions; that the course set by the master when he left the bridge at midnight was steered thereafter; that under the circumstances it was not necessary to use the lead; that, notwithstanding the conflict bf evidence, the Court is of opinion that the usual look-out was kept; that at 2 a.m. of the 16th June the weather was hazy with fog and rain; that when the fog bank or land was seen the chief officer then in charge omitted to carry out the orders left with him to call the master; that with the appliances on board the Court is of opinion that the vessel appears to have been fairly manned; that the vessel was navigated with proper and seamanlike care, with the exception of the omission above referred to; that in consequence of the stranding the vessel was materially damaged; that the master is not in default; that while the chief officer cannot be acquitted of default in not calling the master the Court is of opinion, taking into consideration the whole circumstances and his good character, that the case will be met by his being severely censured and admonished to be more careful in future, and he is hereby censured and admonished accordingly.

The Court makes no order as to costs.

Dated at Glasgow this 28th day of July 1881.

 

(Signed)

WM. STIRLING, J.P.

 

 

DONALD MATHESON, J.P.

We concur in the above report.

 

(Signed)

HY. HARRIS,

Assessors.

 

 

C. J. WARD,

 

Annex to the Report.

The "Ashburne" was built of iron at Sunderland in the year 1879, and registered at that port of the burden of 2,469 tons gross and 1,613 register, with engines of 300 horse-power. She was double-bottomed, which will hereafter appear to have been an important feature in the case, as it enabled her to cross the Atlantic in safety after the casualty. She was owned by Mr. John Storey Barwick, of Sunderland, and others; was manned by a crew of 25 hands all told, and was under the command of Mr. William Hall, who holds an extra master's certificate.

The vessel left Montreal on the 11th of June last, bound for Glasgow, with a general cargo of 2,400 tons, including 312 live cattle and 540 sheep, which were under the charge of 17 men. There were also 5 passengers on board. Her draught of water was 20 feet 10 inches aft and 20 feet forward.

Nothing of any moment occurred during her passage into the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

She passed to the southward of the island of Anticosti, and at 6 p.m. of the 15th June she was in latitude 49° 20' N. longitude 59° 40' west by observation. From this position a course was shaped and steered E. by N. magnetic to make the light on Rich Point, at the entrance of the Straits of Belle Isle. At this time land was seen to the southward, at the estimated distance of 40 miles; the wind was light, with occasional fog banks, and the speed of the vessel throughout was 9 knots. At midnight the chief mate took charge of the deck, with orders to call the captain if the weather became thick. At 2 a.m. it became hazy with rain, with a fog bank hanging over the land. Unfortunately the mate omitted to call the captain as instructed, and at 2.30 a.m. the vessel struck at the entrance of Mall Bay. Efforts were made to get the ship off by carrying out a kedge, throwing the cattle overboard and a portion of the cargo, and also by the French gun-boat, the "Indre," to tow the vessel off, but without success. On the 21st the "Ashburne" came off by her own engines, and proceeded to Hawk Bay, where she re-shipped 180 of the jettisoned beasts, the remainder having been driven into the bush by the natives, and some of them slaughtered. The sheep were all drowned. On the 25th June the ship proceeded on her voyage, the captain of the French gunboat having lent his diver to examine her bottom, which was found to have been injured in one ballast tank only. On the 5th July the vessel arrived safely at Glasgow, discharged her cargo, and proceeded to Liverpool, where she was docked, when it was found by the surveyor that she had been materially damaged. No lives were lost.

At the conclusion of the evidence the following questions were submitted to the Court by Mr. Douglas, the solicitor for the Board of Trade:—

Whether a safe and proper course was set and steered after passing Anticosti, and whether due and proper allowance was made for tide and currents?

Whether proper measures were taken to ascertain and verify the position of the vessel upon the course steered from time to time, and whether the calculations made at noon and at 6 o'clock p.m. on the 15th June correctly gave the position of the vessel at noon on that day?

Whether the master was on deck at a time when the safety of the vessel required his personal supervision?

Whether the course set by the master, and, as he stated, directed by him before he left the bridge was steered thereafter?

Whether the total neglect of the lead after 4 o'clock a.m. on the 15th of June was justifiable?

Whether a good and proper look-out was kept?

Whether the weather was clear, or thick with fog, or fog banks at or after 2 o'clock on the morning of the 16th of June?

Whether, when the fog bank was seen round the vessel, the chief officer was justified in neglecting to call the master, in neglecting to ease the engines, and in neglecting to heave the lead?

Whether the vessel was efficiently and properly manned?

Whether the vessel was navigated with proper and seamanlike care?

Whether, in consequence of the stranding, the vessel was materially damaged?

Whether the master and chief officer are, or either of them is, in default?

These questions are answered in the report.

L 367. 835. 150.—8/81. Wt. 203. E. & S.