|Description:||Board of Trade Wreck Report for 'Port Yarrock', 1894|
|Creator:||Board of Trade|
|Copyright:||Out of copyright|
The Merchant Shipping Acts, 1854 to 1887.
IN the matter of a formal Investigation held in the Sheriff Court, Glasgow, on the 20th, 21st, 22nd, and 27th days of March 1894, before JOHN BLACK LESLIE BIRNIE, Esquire, Advocate Sheriff-Substitute of Lanarkshire, assisted by Captains KENNETT HORE, J. KIDDLE, R.N., and WILLIAM ERSKINE, into the circumstances attending the stranding and loss of the British sailing ship "PORT YARROCK," of Glasgow, in Brandon Bay, on 28th January 1894, whereby loss of life ensued.
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 vessel and all hands was dragging her anchors during a heavy gale of wind in Brandon Bay, whereby she stranded and became a total wreck. The crew clung to the masts and rigging until these were carried away, when they were washed overboard and drowned. The Court finds the managing owner, Mr. Robert John Rowat, to blame for allowing the vessel to go to sea short handed, and for not sending immediate instructions to the master to remove the vessel to a place of safety from Brandon Bay, and fines him in the sum of 75l. towards the expenses of this inquiry.
Dated this 27th day of March 1894.
J. B. L. BIRNIE, Judge.
We concur in the above report.
Annex to the Report.
This was an inquiry into the circumstances attending the stranding and loss of the British sailing vessel "Port Yarrock" with her entire crew at Brandon Bay on the west coast of Ireland on the 28th of January 1894, and held at the County Buildings, Glasgow, before Sheriff Birnie. Mr. C Donald appeared for the Board of Trade, Mr J. A. Spens and Mr. Wyllie for the owners, Messrs. Crawford and Rowat, Mr. McPhail. advocate, for the owners of the cargo, and Mr. Rennie for Mr. Baines, father of one of the apprentices.
The "Port Yarrock," official number 93,305, was a British sailing ship, built at Port Glasgow, county of Renfrew, in 1886, by Messrs. Russell and Co., and registered at Glasgow, No. 76/1886. She was owned by Messrs. Crawford and Rowat and others, as set forth in the register, Messrs. Crawford and Rowat, of 70, Wellington Street, Glasgow, being the managing owners, under date July 1, 1891. The vessel's gross tonnage was 1,378'66 tons, and her registered tonnage 1,317.72 tons. She was built of iron, rigged as a barque, her length being 230.85 ft., breadth 36.2 ft., and depth of hold 21.7 ft. She had a poop-forecastle and a house on deck, and was classed 100 A1 at Lloyd's. She carried a lifeboat (constructed and passed by the Board of Trade Surveyor to carry 24 hands). She had two other boats stowed on skids, and also a small boat, and she was well found, properly fitted and equipped in masts, sails, gear, and tackle, spare spars, boats and compasses, &c. The vessel had passed her first survey for Lloyd's on October 6th, 1892, at Dublin, when her anchors and chains had been examined, and masts, spars, and sails thoroughly overhauled, Lloyd's certificate of classification being produced. From Dublin the "Port Yarrock" went to Cardiff to load, and here again she was partially surveyed by Mr. Richards and Mr. Williams, Board of Trade Surveyors to the port. This latter survey seems, however, to have been restricted principally to the boats, lights, and life-saving appliances. Neither of these gentlemen looked at the chains (except what was on deck), or the sails, spars, spare gear, &c. And it should be here noted that the vessel had no steam appliances of any description for working the windlass, or discharging the cargo, or assisting the crew, everything having to be done by hand. On the 29th of October 1892 the "Port Yarrock" left Cardiff bound for Santa Rosalia, on the west coast of America, with a crew of 22 hands all told, as follows:—
Thomas Forbes, Ma
First voyage as
master in this
G. A. Royle, 1, Master
Second voyage as
G. O. Keeffe, 2, Master
Second voyage in
T. McCulloch, Carpenter
Had been several
voyages to sea.
R. Grant, Sailmaker
Had been several
voyages to sea.
B. Harrison, Steward
Had been several
voyages to sea.
S. Kenshill, Cook
Eleven years steward
J. A. Rombery
C. M. Olsen
O.S., under 17 years
of age, had never
been to sea before.
W. P. Baine, Apprentice
Joined ship 14th
May 1891, age 19.
Herbert Everett do.
Never been to sea
before, age 15 1/2.
Arthur F. Wells do.
Never been to sea
before, age 16 1/2.
Charles T. Gardner do.
Never been to sea
before, age 17 1/2.
George C. Doswell do.
Never been to sea
before, age 15 1/2.
Robert T. E. Eaton do.
Never been to sea
before, age 16 1/2.
And it will be seen that of this number six had never been to sea before, and could neither hand, reef, or steer, and were therefore practically useless as seamen.
After dividing this crew into watches and allowing one man at the wheel and another on the look-out at night, there was only one A.B. in one watch and two in the other, and this in a vessel over 1,300 tons register, and with something like 5,000 yards of canvas to manage, was not, in the opinion of the Court, a sufficient or an efficient crew to work her. The owner stated that he had left these matters entirely in the hands of the master, and he did not know how many men were shipped; but it was clearly his duty to know how many men were shipped and how many were going, as stores had to be provided for a certain number. And it seems incredible to the Court that, seeing these men were actually shipped on the 26th and did not sail till the 29th of October, the owner did not know how many men were engaged to sail in the vessel before she left Cardiff. However, she sailed with a cargo of 1,750 tons of coke briquettes, the voyage out being unusually long—about 170 days. Whether this was due to being shorthanded or unlucky in the matter of winds and weather there is no evidence to show; but it seems that another vessel, which left Cardiff five days after the "Port Yarrock," reached Santa Rosalia about a month before her. The "Port Yarrock" arrived at Santa Rosalia on the 18th of April, and remained there till the 4th of July, during which time she discharged her outward cargo and took on board a return cargo of about 2,075 tons of copper ore. She left Santa Rosalia on the 4th of July 1893. While there the master received a letter from the owners in which they expressed the opinion that he had gone out from Cardiff' shorthanded, and enjoining him to engage two or three sailors at Santa Rosalia. Whether this was on account of the long passage out which the ship had made, or from any other reason, the Court is unable to say, but the fact remains that the owners were then clearly of opinion that the ship was under-manned. The master did not follow out these instructions, but discharged one of the crew, and although he is said to have engaged two sailors, they did not join, and there does not seem to be any mention of this fact in the ship's papers. The consequence was that he sailed from Santa Rosalia on the voyage to Greenstown for orders with a crew of only 21 men, there being six A.B.'s now instead of seven. The ill-luck that had attended the outward voyage seems to have been intensified on the homeward voyage. On the 7th of October the steward committed suicide, and on investigating into the state of the stores and provisions, it was found that a large quantity of the general provisions and medical comforts had been made away with, and that there was nothing but salt meat and a very short supply of flour left. In fact, there were only provisions for about 90 days. The natural result of living upon salt provisions very soon showed itself, and several of the crew were attacked with scurvy, and the rest were weakened and worn out by continual heavy weather and having to do the work of the others, and by the shortness and insufficiency of the rations supplied to them. About the 1st of January the vessel was to the S.W. of Cape Clear, and within two days easy sail of Queenstown, but heavy weather again set in from the S.E., and with her crew sick and shorthanded, she was driven to the northward of Cape Clear, and unable to take advantage of the wind when it shifted to the S.W. From the 1st to the 20th of January the vessel met with unprecedentedly bad weather, even for the stormy coast of the west of Ireland, and she appears to have been several times nearly wrecked during these gales, which were blowing heavily at this time from the S.W. and westward, the ship then being on a lee shore. And this is the saddest part of her unfortunate story, for had the ship been properly manned and handled when she encountered the S.E. gale on January the 1st, the wind when it shifted to the S.W. (as it did afterwards) would have been a fair wind for her to have made Queenstown, and this loss would in all probability have never been recorded. But, on the contrary, as events showed, on the afternoon of the 20th of January, with only a foresail and main-lower topsail set, the rest of the canvas either blown away or hanging in shreds to the yards, her crew utterly worn out, half of them sick and laid up, and with only a day's provisions on board, she was at last compelled to bear up for Brandon Bay, where, meeting with a fisherman as pilot, she was brought up with both her anchors and 90 fathoms of chain on each cable in about six fathoms of water. The next day, Sunday, January 21, the master wired to the owner from Tralee for immediate assistance to get the ship out of that place, as is was not a safe anchorage for her to be in, telling him at the same time that they were in great distress, half the crew laid up, sails lost, and short of provisions. At Tralee the master saw Mr. McCowen, Lloyd's agent, who also pointed out to him the danger of the ship laying in Brandon Bay in the month of January, and the weather they were then likely to meet with, and offered to send assistance and tow the ship to a place of safety. The master, however, seems to have been apprehensive of incurring this expense on his own responsibility and without the express permission of the owners, for on the afternoon of Monday, January 22, he again wired, saying:"Lloyd's " agent want the ship in a safer place, but who is " to pay? &c." Messrs. McCowan also wired to the owners on the same day, saying "they would be " glad to give assistance and supply steamer to tow " vessel to place of safety." The owners had on the Monday night engaged the "Knight Templar" in Liverpool to proceed to Brandon Bay, and tow the "Port Yarrock" to Antwerp, her port of discharge, taking five runners to assist the crew, and had wired the master to this effect, but only adding in their third telegram the words "Take precautions for vessel's safety," and this, in the opinion of the Court, was not a sufficient or an explicit replyto the urgent telegrams they had received from the master and Lloyd's agent, telling them of the ship's condition and the danger she was in; for it must have been plain to the owners that the "Knight Templar," under the most favourable circumstances, could not reach Brandon Bay before Wednesday afternoon, and in the state of the weather it would most probably be Thursday, and this in reality proved to be the case. The "Knight Templar" only arrived at 6 p.m. on Thursday night, and although the "Port Yarrock" could have been easily towed to a safe anchorage on Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday, she remained where she was in that exposed position in Brandon Bay with her sick crew for the want of a plain and distinct telegram from her owner to the master, telling him to take the vessel to a safe anchorage until the "Knight Templar" arrived, and to engage steam if necessary to do so. On the arrival of the "Knight Templar" the weather was too bad to attempt to take the "Port Yarrock" in tow, and the tug herself had to run in close to the pier during the night for shelter. On Friday the wind and sea increased from W.N.W., and blew heavily, and on Saturday it was blowing a fierce gale from W.N.W. to N.W,, and a tremendous sea coming into the bay, and the "Port Yarrock" began dragging her anchors and made signals of distress. She, however, held on till Sunday morning the 28th, when the wind shifted to N.N.W. and north, and the seas began to break heavily on board of her, driving her steadily towards the shore, and on Sunday night she stranded about 400 yards from the beach, opposite the village of Stradbally. A mounted messenger was sent off to Mr. McCowans, Lloyd's agent at Tralee, who at once wired to Fenit station for the lifeboat to put to sea, and then proceeded to the scene of the wreck himself, with some two or three men of the Castle Gregory police force. They could see the lights in the cabin, but could make out no one on board. At 3 a.m., when it was low water, the wind fell considerably, and it seems very extraordinary that at this time the crew made no effort to save themselves by lowering one of their own boats. Whether they were stove, or the crew were unable to get them over the side, or whether they thought it would be better to stay where they were till daylight it is impossible to say, and there is no evidence to show. But by daylight on Monday the wind was again blowing heavily and the tide rising, and at 7 a.m. the sea swept over the ship from stem to stern. At 8.30 the crew took to the rigging, or as many as could get aloft, 15 being counted in the rigging altogether; there they remained till 9, when the masts went over the side and they were washed away and drowned, and by 9.30 there was nothing more to be seen of the wreck except the two ends just above the water's edge.
In conclusion the Court feels bound to call attention to the reprehensible practice of manning ships with merely boys as apprentices, who count as seamen on the articles in point of numbers, but who naturally on their first voyage are practically useless, being neither able to go aloft or steer. In this vessel, of the eight lads, only two had made a voyage before. The six apprentices were premium apprentices paying the owner, and had been supplied with proper outfits by their parents to live as apprentices until they had learned their business, but what they really had to do in Rosalia was to work as "cargo lumpers," to save the owners employing labour from the shore, and to count on the ship's articles as among the crew, while the owners paid them no wages. The vessel by these means was sailed much more economically than she could have otherwise been.
At the conclusion of the evidence the following questions were submitted to the Board of Trade. Mr. Rennie, Mr. McPhail, and Mr. Spens addressed the Court on the part of their clients, and Mr. Donald having replied, the Court proceeded to give judgment as follows:—
1. Whether when the vessel left Cardiff in October 1892 she was properly manned, especially as there would appear to have been no steam winch?
2. Whether she was well found in sails, spars, and rigging, and whether she had on board the medical comforts required by regulations issued by the Board of Trade under the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1867?
3. Whether the vessel was supplied with a sufficient quantity of stores and provisions for the crew?
4. What instructions were given by the owners to the master in the printed form and in their letter of the 26th October, 1892?
5. Whether, in the opinion of the Court, those instructions intimated to the master that his employment depended upon sailing the vessel upon "strict economy"?
6. Whether when the vessel was at Santa Rosalia the steward wrongfully sold her stores, and whether this fact was known to the master before leaving?
7. Whether the vessel left Santa Rosalia with a sufficient supply of stores for the voyage home including water?
8. Whether when the vessel left Santa Rosalia she was properly and sufficiently manned?
9. What was the condition of the vessel, and in what state of health were her crew when the vessel arrived in Brandon Bay?
10. Whether the master was justified in refusing the offer of Lloyd's agent to have the vessel towed to a place of safety?
11. Whether, in the opinion of the Court, the failure of the master of the "Port Yarrock" to avail himself of the offer of Lloyd's agent was due to his desire to carry out the owners' instructions to exercise strict economy?
12. Whether the communications which passed between the master and Lloyd's agent with the owners were such as to convey to them the dangerous position of the vessel, and the need of having her at once removed to a place of safety?
13. Whether the owners should have given instructions to the master to have the vessel removed from Brandon Bay to a place of safety pending the arrival of the "Knight Templar"?
14. Whether the communications which passed from the master to the owners were such as to convey to them the urgent necessity for immediate assistance?
15. Whether upon receiving communications from the master the owners took prompt and proper measures to provide him with the necessary assistance?
16. Whether there was any undue delay in the dispatch of the tug "Knight Templar" with the runners on board?
17. Whether upon the arrival of the "Knight Templar" in Brandon Bay every possible effort was made by her master to take the "Port Yarrock" in tow or to put the runners on board?
18. What are the circumstances in which the Fenit lifeboat failed to render assistance to the "Port Yarrock"?
19. What were the circumstances in which the coastguard at Dingle failed to render assistance with the rocket apparatus?
20. What, in the opinion of the Court, was the cause of the loss of this vessel and all hands?
21. Whether blame attaches to Mr. Robert James Rowat, managing owner of the "Port Yarrock?
22. Whether, in the opinion of the Court, the state of the vessel on leaving Santa Rosalia was due to any misbehaviour on the part of the master?
23. What was the value of the "Port Yarrock," and for what amount was she insured?
24. What was the value of her freight, and for what amount was it insured?
25. Whether, in the opinion of the Court, the establishment of a lifeboat, or of a rocket apparatus, or of telegraphic communication in or at Blandon Bay is essentially necessary?
Answers to the Questions.
1. When the "Port Yarrock" left Cardiff on October the 29th, 1892, her crew consisted of the master, two officers, carpenter, sailmaker, steward, and cook, seven A.B.'s (all foreigners), two O.S. (or boys under 17 years of age), one of whom had never been to sea before, and six apprentices, five of whom had never been to sea before, making a total of twenty-two hands all told. But out of this number six could neither "hand, reef, or steer," and were for the time being practically useless as seamen, and the vessel was therefore, in the opinion of the Court, neither sufficiently nor efficiently manned, especially as it was admitted in evidence that there was neither a steam winch or any steam appliances on board to assist the crew in the working of the ship.
2. It was stated in evidence that the vessel was well found in sails, spars, and rigging, and that she was thoroughly and efficiently equipped. She had been surveyed by Lloyd's surveyor in Dublin for her No. 1 survey for Lloyd's 100 Al class on the 6th of October 1892, and she had also been surveyed by the Board of Trade surveyors in Cardiff before sailing in October 1892. She had on board the medical comforts required by the Board of Trade regulations under the Merchant Shipping Act of 1867. The medicine chest was refilled and put on board by Mr. Treharne (chemist), of Cardiff, who was called as a witness, the remainder of the medical stores being supplied in the provision list.
3. The vessel had provisions and stores for a crew of twenty-four men for fourteen months when she left Cardiff; they were said to be of the best quality, and were supplied by Messrs. Russell and Co., of Glasgow, and Messrs. Spillar and Co., of Cardiff. A list of the provisions supplied and the price from Messrs. Russell and Co. was produced to the Court. She had two water tanks (said to contain 4,500 galls. in all) which were full when she left Cardiff—the water bill being also produced. Although the provisions on board as a total quantity were sufficient for the voyage, the Court cannot refrain from remarking that in the items of beef and pork supplied (in accordance with the provision list) there was a great discrepancy in the proportions, there being 28 tierces of beef at 62s. 6d. per tierce and only 6 barrels of pork at 75s. per barrel.
4. The usual regulations and instructions which most owners give to the master before sailing. In the disbursement clause of these instructions the words "strict economy" are underlined, but there are other words underlined also where some special point is brought to the master's notice. The letter of October 26th was simply a letter of instructions, and principally refers to the outward freight.
5. There were no unusual instructions contained in these letters which would, in the opinion of the Court, have intimated to the master that his employment depended upon sailing the vessel with "special economy," although, as it eventually proved, the master was nervously apprehensive of incurring expenses which were absolutely necessary for the vessel's safety.
6. The Court think it probable, but do not feel themselves entitled to hold it proved, that the steward wrongfully sold provisions at Santa Rosalia. Nor do they think it proved that, if he did, the master was aware of it before leaving.
7. There should have been ample stores on board when the vessel left Santa Rosalia, about 4th July, including water, for an ordinary voyage home.
8. When the vessel left Santa Rosalia she was neither properly or sufficiently manned, she had in fact fewer A.B.'s than when she left Cardiff, one having been discharged at Santa Rosalia.
9. The "Port Yarrock" sailed into Brandon Bay with only a main lower topsail and foresail set. The rest of. her sails were either blown away or hanging in shreds to the yards, and she was nearly a wreck aloft as regards canvas; four out of her crew were laid up with scurvy, and helpless either to go aloft or assist in working the ship. The steward had committed suicide as far back as October the 7th, and there were only fifteen hands and the cook to work the vessel, and of these fifteen hands seven apprentices and ordinary seamen, they were in a state of exhaustion from long exposure to bad weather, overwork, sickness, and short food. They had been out nearly 200 days and were in great distress (as the following telegram from the master to the owner clearly shows):—
" January 21st, Tralee.
" Put into Brandon Bay, West of Ireland; lost sails " and other damage. I want immediate assistance to " get out of this, it is not a safe place to lay; half my " crew is (are) sick, and I am short of provisions. " Wire me immediate instructions; will keep open till " nine (i.e the telegraph office) to-night for reply."
10. The master was not justified in refusing the offer of Lloyd's agent to tow the vessel to a place of safety.
11. In the opinion of the Court the failure of the master to avail himself of the offer of Lloyd's agent to tow the vessel to a place of safety was due to his anxiety to have the owners' express permission. On 22nd January (Monday), at 2.45 p.m., he wired:— " Lloyd's here want the ship in a safer place, but who " is to pay? I am quite safe with wind only (except) " from North to N.E.; afraid of change now and will " not stop here (Tralee) any longer, but will keep the " ship safe until you send me the necessary assist- " ance."
12. The communications were such as to convey to the owners the dangerous position of the vessel. In the master's first telegram, received by the managing owner on Sunday night, he points out the dangerous position of the vessel—that she had lost her sails and received other damage, that half her crew were sick, and that immediate assistance was required to get her out of Brandon Bay. Lloyd's agents also wired from Tralee to the owners on the Monday:—"Port Yarrock. Will be glad to give you assistance and supply " steamer to tow vessel to place of safety. Wire." But this telegram was only acknowledged by a letter.
13. Referring to the telegrams in the previous answers, the owners, in the opinion of the Court, should have immediately wired instructions to have the vessel removed to a place of safety pending the arrival of the " Knight Templar."
14. The communications which passed between the master and the owners were of such a nature as to convey to them the urgent necessity for immediate assistance being sent to the vessel. See answers to 9 and 12.
15. The owners did not take prompt and proper measures to provide the master with the necessary assistance, inasmuch as on receiving his first telegram they ought at once to have instructed him to take the ship to a safe anchorage. The Court are of opinion that the owners' telegrams, including the telegram— "In meantime, take precautions for vessel's safety," were insufficient.
16. There was no undue delay in the dispatch of the "Knight Templar." The principal delay in her reaching Brandon Bay was on account of the weather, which blew heavily from the N.W. She left Liverpool on Monday, January 22nd, at 11 p.m., and arrived at Brandon Bay on Thursday the 25th, at 6 p.m.
17. No attempt was made, or was it possible, for the "Knight Templar" to take the "Port Yarrock" in tow or put the runners on board, on account of the state of the weather. The "Knight Templar" anchored ahead of the "Port Yarrock" on her arrival, but had to go further inside for shelter shortly afterwards.
18. The coxswain of the Fenit lifeboat, on the receipt of a telegram from Lloyd's agent at Tralee, used all dispatch in manning the lifeboat, and in 20 minutes after the signal was given, he left Fenit for Brandon Bay. The wind was N.W., blowing heavily, The lifeboat beat up Tralee Bay, but owing to the wind and sea was unable to reach the vessel, although she made repeated attempts to get through the Hogs Rocks Channel. At 3 a.m. she anchored under the islands, and at daylight made another attempt to get through, but no headway could be made against the wind and sea. The crew being now exhausted, they ran back before the wind to Fenit, and arrived at 8.30 a.m. At 9.30 a.m. they made another attempt, but failing to make any progress, they returned and wired to Lloyd's agent the result of their failure.
19. A telegram was sent by Lloyd's agent at Tralee to the divisional officer of coast-guard at Dingle Bay, to send the rocket apparatus to Brandon Bay, This telegram, although written out by Lloyd's agent at Tralee on Sunday evening before he left for the wreck, appears not to have been received at Dingle until Monday morning. The rocket apparatus was immediately dispatched by volunteers and horses. It is a heavy road, and the distance about 15 miles over a mountain some 3,000 ft. high. The apparatus left at 10.20 a.m. of the 29th, and arrived at 2.20 p.m.; but all the crew of the "Port Yarrock" had been drowned.
20. The immediate cause of the loss of the vessel and all hands was dragging her anchors during a heavy gale of wind from the N.W. in Brandon Bay, and then stranding and becoming a total wreck. The crew clung to the masts and rigging till these were carried away, and the crew were then washed overboard and drowned. What further contributed to the disaster was the fact of the vessel being shorthanded, her sails blown away, except the foresail and lower main topsail, and her crew sick and exhausted and short of provisions. She was on these accounts compelled to put into Brandon Bay in distress, being unable to keep at sea any longer. Thirteen bodies were recovered in all, but only three had life-belts.
21. Grave blame attaches to Mr. Robert James Rowat, managing owner, in respect: (1st) he did not make certain the ship was efficiently manned before leaving Cardiff; (2nd) he did not make clear to the master his first duty was to take the ship from Brandon Bay to a place of safety.
22. There is no direct evidence before the Court to show that the state of the vessel on leaving Santa Rosalia was due to any misbehaviour on the part of the master, but it is in evidence that he did not carry out the owners instructions with regard to shipping more men, and even came home with less.
23. The original cost of the "Port Yarrock" was said to be 13,250l., and her present value 11,000l., and she was insured for 11,0001.
24. The value of her freight was 3,250l., and it was insured for 3,2501.
25. The Court is of opinion that owing to the exposed position of Brandan Bay to winds from W.N.W. to N.E., and the heavy seas which set into it from the Atlantic, and the bad holding-ground, that no ships should seek shelter in this anchorage unless in an extreme case. As far as can be judged from the circumstances attending this and a previous casualty, the use of a lifeboat would have been of little or no service after the stranding took place. A rocket apparatus would be serviceable provided local men could be trained to use it, but as there is one already stationed at Dingle Bay (which would have been of inestimable service in this casualty had there been telegraph communication between Brandon and Dingle Bay), it seems that a telegraph station at Brandon Bay would best meet the present requirements, and at once be the means of communication with the lifeboat station at Fenel and the rocket apparatus in Dingle Bay.
The Court finds the managing owner, Mr. Robert John Rowat, liable to the Board of Trade in 75l. towards the expenses of the inquiry, and quoad ultra, makes no order as to expenses.
J. B. L. BIRNIE, Judge.
We concur in the above report.
28th March 1894.
76268—226. 180.—4/94. Wt. 60. E. & S.