Wreck Report for 'Affigo', 1882

(No. 1276.)

"AFFIGO."

The Merchant Shipping Acts, 1854 to 1876.

IN the matter of the formal Investigation held at the Sessions Court, Town Hall, Hull, on the 1st of March 1882, before H. C. ROTHERY, Esquire, Wreck Commissioner, assisted by Captain FORSTER and Captain WILSON, as Assessors, into the circumstances attending the supposed loss of the sailing ship "AFFIGO," of Goole, whilst on a voyage from Goole to Teignmouth with a cargo of coal.

Report of Court.

The Court, having carefully inquired into the circumstances of the above-mentioned shipping casualty, finds, for the reasons annexed, that the said ship was in a good and seaworthy condition, and was not too deeply laden when she left Goole on the 11th of October last, and that she probably foundered during the violent gale which, we are told, occurred soon after she sailed.

The Court is not asked to make any order as to costs.

Dated this 1st day of March 1882.

 

(Signed)

H. C. ROTHERY, Wreck Commissioner.

We concur in the above report.

 

(Signed)

GEORGE H. FORSTER,

Assessors.

 

 

R. WILSON,

 

Annex to the Report.

This case was heard at Hull on the 1st of March instant, when Mr. Ravenhill appeared for the Board of Trade, and Mr. Hearfield for the owner of the "Affigo." Seven witnesses having been produced by the Board of Trade and examined, Mr. Ravenhill handed in a statement of the questions upon which the Board of Trade desired the opinion of the Court. Mr. Hearfield then addressed the Court on behalf of the owner, and Mr. Ravenhill having replied for the Board of Trade, the Court proceeded to give judgment on the questions on which its opinion had been asked. The circumstances of the case are as follow:—

The "Affigo," which was a wooden schooner, belonging to the Port of Goole, of 86 tons register, was built at Knottingley, in the County of Yorkshire, in the year 1865, and at the time of her loss was the property of Mr. John Rhodes, junior, of Knottingley. She left Goole on Tuesday, the 11th of October last, for Teignmouth, with a crew of four hands all told, and having on board a cargo of about 139 tons of coal, and from that time she has not been heard of, and there can, after this lapse of time, be now no doubt that she has long since gone to the bottom, with all hands. It is under these circumstances that an inquiry has been ordered, to ascertain, if possible, what has become of her.

Now the first question upon which our opinion has been asked is, "Whether when the 'Affigo' left Goole on October 11th, 1881, she was in good and seaworthy condition?" It appears, as I have said, that the vessel was built in the year 1865, and from the evidence of Mr. Worfolk, the builder, she was constructed for the most part of British oak, and was a thoroughly good, strong, sound, little vessel, and being intended for the coasting trade and to take the ground the bilges were made extra strong. In the year 1879 she was run into by a barque in the river Thames and very seriously damaged, and on that occasion she was docked and thoroughly repaired at an expense of about 4001. From that time no very important repairs appear to have been done to her; but on the 4th of October last, shortly before her departure, she was examined by Mr. Whitteron, the surveyor to the club in which she was insured, who recommended some trifling defects to be made good; and we were told by him that he then found her to be in a thoroughly good and seaworthy condition, and we have no reason to doubt that that was so.

The second question which we are asked is, "Whether the hatches and deck openings were properly constructed and secured" We were told by Mr. Worfolk, the builder, that she had a companion to the forecastle 2 feet wide by 2 feet 6 to 9 inches long; the fore hatchway was about 4 feet 6 inches square, the main hatchway about 14 feet 6 inches long by 8 feet 6 inches wide, and the after hatch about 8 feet square. The entrance also to the cabin was by a companion about 2 feet wide by 2 feet 10 to 3 feet long. In addition to which there was a skylight about 18 inches by 24. These appear to have been all the deck openings. We are told also that the coamings of the fore hatchway were about 8 to 9 inches deep, those of the main hatchway about 14 inches deep, and those of the after hatch about 27 inches deep. The hatches were secured in the usual way by tarpaulins and battens. This evidence was confirmed by the surveyor; and under these circumstances we have no reason to doubt that her hatchways and deck openings were properly constructed and secured.

The third question which we are asked is, "Whether the cargo was properly stowed?" It seems that the vessel was quite full, with the exception of a space of about two tons in the fore hatchway. Shifting boards, we are told, were not used, because as Mr. Williams, the trimmer, said, they were not required; for it is to be remembered that coal does not settle down like a grain cargo, more particularly on a short voyage like this, and with the hold quite full, as we are told it was, there would be no room for it to shift.

The fourth question which we are asked is, "Whether the vessel was overladen?" It seems that the shipper, Mr. Amery, having been told by the master that the vessel would carry from 145 to 150 tons, ordered 145 tons to be sent down to her. It was found, however, owing to the coal being light, that she would not take it all in, and the last truck containing 6 tons 2 cwt. had accordingly to be left out. She had therefore only about 139 tons on board, which owing to the lightness of the coal was less than she usually carried. With this cargo on board she drew, according to the owner, Mr. John Rhodes, junior, about 9 feet forward, and 9 feet 10 to 10 feet aft, giving a mean of about 9 feet 6; but according to Mr. Williams, who trimmed the coal on this last voyage, she was just down to her load line, and drew 9 feet 3 forward and 10 feet 3 aft, or a mean of 9 feet 9 inches. Now the builder has told us that the total depth of the ship from the bottom of the keel to the upper side of the deck amidships was 11 feet 9 inches, and as the deck had a camber of 9 inches, this would give her a total depth at side of 11 feet, and deducting the draught of water, we should have, according to the owner, a freeboard of 18 inches; according to the trimmer, a freeboard of only 15 inches. On this we are told she would rise from one to two inches on getting out to sea, which would give her from 16 to 20 inches of freeboard; and as the depth of her hold was 9.8 feet, this would give her from 1.6 to 2 inches of freeboard for each foot depth of hold, which for a short coasting voyage would in the opinion of the assessors be sufficient, the more so as she had a sheer of 3 feet forward and 3 feet aft, and a camber of the deck of 9 inches, the proportion of length to breadth being also very small. On the whole, therefore, we are of opinion that she was not overladen.

The fifth question which we are asked is, "What, in the opinion of the Court from the evidence before them, is the cause of this vessel not having been heard of since she left Goole for Teignmouth on the 11th October 1881; and is anyone to blame?" It seems that the coal with which this vessel was laden came from the Glass Houghton Colliery, near Pontefract. The seam from which it was worked is about 350 yards below the surface and has a total thickness of about 4 feet. The upper 2 feet 4 to 6 inches is, we are told, good hard coal, below this is a spavin band of from 4 to 6 inches, and below that about 12 or 14 inches of inferior coal. We were told by Mr. Wardell, the government inspector of mines for the district, as well as by Mr. Waterhouse, the manager of the colliery, that it is remarkably free from gas, and has always been worked with naked lights; whilst, too, iron pyrites is found in the lower stratum of inferior coal, it is very sparsely scattered through the good coal, and is readily detected and thrown aside in the process of screening. We were also told that this coal is always screened before it is sent away, and that that which was shipped on board the "Affigo" had been so screened. Taking all these facts into consideration, and seeing the small amount of the cargo which she had on board, and the shortness of the voyage, I think that we may fairly assume that the loss of the vessel cannot be attributed either to an explosion of gas or to the spontaneous combustion of the coal. it seems, however, that two or three days after the vessel left Goole a severe storm occurred, during which a great number of vessels were lost, and amongst them another vessel which had left Goole at about the same time ?? the "Affigo." Under these circumstances the only conclusion to which we can come is that the "Affigo" probably fonndered in that gale. There is, then, in our opinion no blame attributable to anyone for this casualty.

 

(Signed)

H. C. ROTHERY, Wreck Commissioner.

We concur.

 

(Signed)

GEO. H. FORSTER,

Assessors.

 

 

R. WILSON,

 

L 367. 1046. 150.—3/82. Wt. 203. E & S.