Battling with waves and lawyers : $b a genuine history of perils of the deep and an authentic record of the most important shipping case ever dealt with in the supreme courts of Australasia
History
Battling with waves and lawyers : $b a genuine history of perils of the deep and an authentic record of the most important shipping case ever dealt with in the supreme courts of Australasia
Alert (Ship : 1877-1893); Liability for marine accidents; Navigation -- Australia -- History; Shipwrecks -- Australia -- Victoria
The hearing of Messrs. Huddart, Parker and Co.’s appeal commenced
on Wednesday, May 8, 1895, in the Supreme Court, Melbourne, before
the full court consisting of Chief Justice Madden, Mr. Justice
Hodges, and Mr. Justice Hood. The Attorney-General (Mr. Isaacs), Mr.
Purves, and Mr. Coldham (instructed by Messrs. Malleson, England, and
Stewart) appeared for the defendants in support of the application,
and Mr. C. A. Smyth, Mr. Box, and Mr. Williams, for the plaintiff to
oppose it.
MR. ISAACS, at great length, read over portions of the evidence given
before Mr. Justice Williams during the previous trial, and concluded
by strongly urging that a new trial should be granted on the grounds,
first of misdirection by the judge; and second, of the jury’s verdict
being given against the weight of evidence.
MR. SMYTH, Mr. Box, and Mr. Williams, also at great length, read over
portions of the evidence, and contended that the judge’s direction
to the jury was a fair one, and the jury’s verdict a just one which
should not be disturbed.
During the course of arguing the various items, the Chief Justice
pointed out that “the effect of a second mast on the _Alert_ would
have been to weigh the stern of the vessel down still more than it
was down.”
MR. SMYTH: It would have assisted in getting the vessel up to the
wind.
CHIEF JUSTICE MADDEN: I cannot see how much better off the vessel
would be had there been another mast, except that with a sail on it,
perhaps the steamer might have been steadied.
MR. JUSTICE HOOD: No doubt had there been another mast, persons would
have come forward and said that was the cause of the disaster.
CHIEF JUSTICE MADDEN: When persons are in misfortune, generous people
come forward and find ingenious reasons. The first thing a captain
would do, if there were a second mast with a sail up, would probably
be to strip it off like a shot.
MR. SMYTH: Many of the numerous experts were of opinion that a sail
aft would have been not only useful, but actually necessary.
CHIEF JUSTICE MADDEN: These witnesses wished, in a generous impulse,
to make the best argument they could. The generous impulses which
were usually exhibited were attachable in an enlarged degree to
sailors. I think the man would be a wicked one who, knowing the
unsea-worthy condition of a vessel, did not report it to the proper
authorities.
MR. JUSTICE HOOD: What do you say that the owners ought to have done
that they did not do?
MR. SMYTH: The Act says the owner is to take all reasonable means to
ensure the sea-worthiness of the vessel.
MR. JUSTICE HODGES: What would be reasonable means?
MR. SMYTH: One reasonable thing would be to see that there was
protection for the pantry window.
MR. JUSTICE HOOD: Take some other steamer, the _Despatch_ for
instance. What should the owners do to find out whether she was
sea-worthy?
MR. SMYTH: I cannot say exactly. They run the risk.
MR. JUSTICE HODGES: They run the risk of being considered
unreasonable whatever they do.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account