Wreck Report for 'Adam Smith', 1885

(No. 2434.)

ADAM SMITH" (S.S.)

The Merchant Shipping Acts, 1854 to 1876.

IN the matter of a formal Investigation held at Edinburgh Sheriff Court on the Twenty-third day of January, before ANDREW RUTTURFURD, Esq., Sheriff substitute of the Lothians and Peebles, assisted by Captain WARD and Captain MURDOCH, into the circumstances attending the stranding of the British S.S. "ADAM SMITH," on Long Craig Rock, near Kirkcaldy, on the 26th day of December 1884.

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 stranding of the said vessel was due to the failure of the master to use the lead in due time when approaching the Fife coast in hazy weather. The Court finds that the master, Thomas Fitzjohn, was in default, but in the circumstances of the case do not deal with his certificate, considering a censure to be sufficient.

Dated this 24th day of January 1885.

 

(Signed)

AND. RUTTURFURD, Judge.

We concur in the above report.

 

(Signed)

C. Y. WARD,

ALEX. MURDOCH,

Assessors.

Annex to the Report.

The "Adam Smith," official number 62,963, was an iron screw steamer, built at Port Glasgow, in the County of Renfrew, in 1876, her tonnage being 292.54 tons gross, and 159.6 tons register. Her engines were compound surface condensing of 60 horse-power. She was owned and managed by Mr. J. T. Stocks, of Kirkcaldy, at which port she was registered.

The vessel left London on 24th December last, bound to Kirkealdy with a cargo of about 20 tons of general cargo, her draught of water being 6 feet 4 inches forward and 11 feet 3 inches aft. She was commanded by Mr. Thomas Fitzjohn, who holds a certificate of competency as master, No. 102,248, and had a crew of twelve hands all told. The vessel appears to have been well equipped and in good order.

All went well until the 26th December. At 5.30 a.m. on that day the vessel passed outside the Bass Rock, at a distance of a quarter of a mile, the weather was then fine and clear, with a light breeze from west. From this point a course was set and steered N.W. by W. by compass, the deviation on that point being 1/2 a point easterly. The engines were at full speed and the vessel was making about 10 knots an hour. The master was in charge of the watch, and on the bridge.

At 6.30 a.m. the weather became slightly hazy, and at 6.50, as the haze was increasing in density, the engines were slowed down to half speed. At about 7 a.m. some lights were seen in the direction of the land, which were supposed to be the lights at a manufactory close to the eastward of Kirkcaldy harbour. The engines were then stopped and the master ordered a cast of the lead to be taken, before, however, this order could be carried into effect, the vessel struck on rocks. The engines were reversed and moved ahead alternately for some time, but with no effect, the vessel remained fast, and very shortly after filled with water. The boats were hoisted out ready to land the crew if necessary. At daylight it was found the vessel was on the Long Craig Rock, about one mile to the west of Kirkcaldy.

The harbour lights were not seen on passing, and at the time of the stranding there was no one on the look out besides the master. The lights seen at 7 a.m. were not, as supposed, to the east of the harbour, but those of a manufactory to the westward of the town.

The vessel has since become a total wreck. No lives were lost.

At the conclusion of the evidence Mr. Turnbull submitted the following questions, on which the Board of Trade desired the opinion of the Court:-

1. What was the cost of the vessel to her owner?

2. What, in the opinion of the Court, was the value of the vessel at the time she left on her last voyage?

3. What were the insurances effected and how were they apportioned?

4. What number of compasses had the vessel on board, and how were they placed?

5. Did the master ascertain their deviation by observation from time to time?

6. Whether the errors in the compasses were correctly ascertained and the proper corrections to the courses applied?

7. Whether proper measures were taken to ascertain and verify the position of the vessel at about 5.30 a.m. of the 26th December, when off Bass Rock and thereafter?

8. Whether a safe and proper course was set and steered therefrom, and whether due and proper allowance was made for tides and currents?

9. Whether, when the weather became thick, the speed of the engines was promptly and sufficiently reduced?

10. Whether a good and proper look out was kept?

11. Whether the lead was used in time, and, if not, whether its neglect was justifiable?

12. Whether the vessel was navigated with proper and seamanlike care?

13. What was the cause of the stranding of the vessel? and finally

14. Whether the master is in default?

To which the Court replied as follows:-

1. The cost of the vessel to her owners was 7,500l.

2. In the present depressed state of the shipping trade, it is difficult to value any vessel, but it appears that she stands in the owner's book as of 7,000l. value. And the Court is inclined to think that she may have been of that value to him.

3. The hull was insured for 3,750l., and the machinery for 2,500l.-Total, 6,250.

4. There were two compasses on board; one was placed on the bridge, by which the vessel was steered, and one aft, at the stern.

5. The master did not ascertain their deviation by observation from time to time.

6. The errors in the compasses were ascertained by a compass adjuster in August 1884, and the correction to the course steered from Bass Rock was properly applied.

7. Proper measures were taken to ascertain and verify the position of the vessel when off Bass Rock, but not thereafter.

8. The course set and steered therefrom, and the allowance made for tide, were safe and proper, had the precaution to use the lead been taken in time.

9. The speed of the engines was sufficiently reduced when the weather became thick.

10. A good and proper look-out was not kept at and about the time the vessel stranded.

11. The lead was not used in time, and the neglect to do so was not justifiable,

12. With the foregoing exceptions, the vessel was navigated with proper and seamanlike care.

13. The stranding of the vessel was due to the neglect to use the lead.

14. Having regard to the above answers, the Court is compelled to find the master in default, but the evidence proves that he was not negligent, as to personal attention to his duty, and that he was only a little too late in using the lead. Had he taken the precautions to stop the engines and heave the lead, only a few minutes before he did, the casualty would, in all probability, have been averted. Under the circumstances, the Court feels that a censure will meet the justice of the case, and hereby censure the master accordingly, and caution him to be more careful in future.

 

(Signed)

ANDREW RUTTURFURD.

We concur.

 

C. Y. WARD,

ALEX. MURDOCH,

Edinburgh, 24th January 1885.

L 367. 2209. 170.-1/85. Wt. 36. E & S.