Wreck Report for 'Earl Derby', 1886

(No. 2879.)

"EARL DERBY."

The Merchant Shipping Acts, 1854 to 1876.

IN the matter of the formal Investigation held at Westminster, on the 13th of April 1886, before H. C. ROTHERY, Esquire, Wreck Commissioner, assisted by Vice - Admiral POWELL, C.B., and Captains RONALDSON and HYDE, as Assessors, into the circumstances attending the casualty to the sailing ship "EARL DERBY," of Glasgow, on the 20th of June last, when six of her crew were washed overboard and drowned.

Report of Court.

The Court, having carefully inquired into the circumstances of the above-mentioned shipping casualty, finds, for the reasons annexed, that when the said vessel left this country on the voyage in question, she was not overladen, and had sufficient freeboard; that the casualty was due to an exceptionally heavy sea breaking over her and washing the hands out of her; that nothing could have been done to rescue them;. and that no blame attaches to the master or officers.

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

Dated this 13th day of April 1886.

 

(Signed)

H. C. ROTHERY,

Wreck Commissioner.

We concur in the above report.

 

(Signed)

R. ASHMORE POWELL,

A. RONALDSON,

GEORGE HYDE,

Assessors.

Annex to the Report.

This case was heard at Westminster on the 13th of April instant, when Mr. Danckwerts appeared for the Board of Trade, and Mr. Gibson for the owners and master of the "Earl Derby." Seven witnesses having been produced by the Board of Trade and examined, Mr. Danckwerts handed in a statement of the questions upon which the Board of Trade desired the opinion of the Court. Mr. Gibson then addressed the Court on behalf of the master, and Mr. Danckwerts having replied for the Board of Trade, the Court proceeded to give judgment on the questions upon which its opinion had been asked. The circumstances of the case are as follow:—

The "Earl Derby," which is an iron barque, belonging to the Port of Glasgow, of 1,013 tons gross and 961 tons net register, was built at Port Glasgow in the year 1876, and at the time of the casualty which forms the subject of the present inquiry, she was the property of Mr. Alexander McAlister, of No. 21, West India Dock Road, London, and others, Mr. McAlister being the managing owner. She left the West India Docks on the 11th April last year, with a crew of 22 hands all told, and a cargo of about 1,890 tons of general merchandise, bound to Wellington in New Zealand, and at about 7 a.m. of the 20th of June following had arrived in about latitude 42° South and longitude 61° East. At this time, we are told, it was blowing a strong breeze from about west, accompanied by a cross sea and occasional squalls, and the vessel was running before the gale under fore sail, upper and lower fore and main topsails, fore topmast staysail, and maintop gallant sail, heading about E. by S., and making about 11 knots an hour. At about 7.30 a.m. the captain ordered all hands to be called to reef the upper fore topsail, and after hauling the fore braces taut, they were ordered to go and tighten up the main braces, which were getting slack. They were just about to cast off the braces, preparatory to tightening them up, when a heavy sea overtook them, and coming in over the bulwarks on both sides just forward of the poop, carried the boatswain, three able seamen, one ordinary seaman, and an apprentice overboard. It was some little time before it was ascertained that any one had been washed overboard, and it was then too late to do anything. The vessel accordingly was kept on her course, and arrived safely at her port of destination, whence she has since returned to this country.

These being the facts of the case, the first two questions which we are asked are as follow:—

"1. Whether, when the vessel left London on the " 11th of April 1885, she was overladen?" and " 2. Whether she had sufficient freeboard?" It seems that when she left the West India Docks, the water was just lapping the bottom of the disc; and as the centre of the disc was placed at 3 feet 9 1/2 inches below the line of the deck, that would give her a freeboard of about 4 feet 3 1/2. On this, however, she would, on getting into salt water rise some 3 or 4 inches, making the total freeboard about 4 feet 7. Now Mr. Warner, shipwright surveyor to the Board of Trade in the Port of London, has told us that he has carefully examined the vessel, and that the freeboard, which she ought to have by Lloyd's last rules is 3 feet 11 1/2 inches, so that she had some 7 inches in excess of the freeboard required by the rules, and was, in the opinion of the assessors, not overladen.

The third question which we are asked is, "What " was the cause of the casualty which the vessel " sustained on the morning of the 20th June last, " whereby loss of life ensued." The casualty was no doubt due to an exceptionally heavy sea breaking over her, filling her decks, and washing the men out of her.

The fourth question which we are asked is, "Whether " the vessel was navigated in a proper and seamanlike " manner, having due regard to the safety of the lives " of her crew." There is nothing to shew that the vessel was not being navigated in a proper and seamanlike manner, and with due regard to the lives of those on board. We are told that in bad weather she took a good deal of water on deck, but never as much as she took in on this occasion; and it was the duty of the master, seeing that the main braces were getting slack, to order them to be made taut, and there was no reason to think that he was thereby endangering the lives of the crew.

The fifth question which we are asked is, "Whether " the weather was so bad as to render it imprudent to " round the ship to at the time the men were washed " overboard; and whether the master and officers were " justified in neglecting to take any measures to save " the lives of the men?" It was not until some little time afterwards that they were aware that any of the hands had been washed overboard; and by that time, with the speed at which the vessel was going, they would have left them far astern. The assessors are also further of opinion that it would have been very imprudent, if not impossible, to have rounded the vessel to, until they had shortened sail, and put her under her two lower topsails; and by that time they would have been miles away from the spot. They think there is nothing which the master or officers could have done to save the lives of these men.

The sixth question which we are asked is, "Whether " the master and officers are, or either of them is, in " default?" In our opinion neither the master nor the officers are in any respect in default.

 

(Signed)

H. C. ROTHERY,

Wreck Commissioner.

We concur.

 

(Signed)

R. ASHMORE POWELL,

A. RONALDSON,

GEORGE HYDE,

Assessors.

L 367. 2659. 200.—4/86. Wt. 12. E. & S.