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
_Q._—We are told by witnesses that her freeboard aft was only about
two feet? _A._—That is wrong. She had double that. She never had less
than four feet aft from the water’s edge to the deck. She used to
draw ten feet six inches aft, and her depth of hold was nine feet six
inches.
_Q._—Then how could she get the freeboard? _A._—Because she had a
long heel aft.
_Q._—Did you say to-day that it was according to the weather, and
that in bad weather the _Alert_ would not behave very grand? _A._—I
don’t remember saying that, but if I did, it would be true of her, or
any other ship.
_Q._—When you were in the _Alert_, did she ever take water down into
the engine room or stoke-hole? _A._—It might be a few drops, or a
bucketful, down through the gratings, or the doors.
CHARLES WILLIAM MCLEAN was recalled to explain that although there
was a clause in the _Alert’s_ river and Bay certificate that she was
not fit to ply outside the river and Bay, as defined by the Act, it
did not mean that the vessel was unfit to go outside the Heads.
HIS HONOUR: That is a question for argument.
MR. SMYTH: I shall argue that the vessel was certified as unfit to go
outside the Heads.
MR. PURVES: That is an absurd argument, because there was a
subsequent declaration that she was fit to go outside.
HIS HONOUR: I think it is a question of construction. If the vessel
was going to trade in the river and Bay, she got a certificate to
that effect. If she were going to trade outside the Heads, she must
have a certificate for outside. The one is not inconsistent with the
other. That is the view I hold at present.
CARL GUSTAFSON, examined by Mr. Purves, stated: I am a Russian Finn
and an A.B. seaman in the employ of Huddart, Parker and Co. I am now
forty-eight years of age, and have been at sea since I was nine years
old. I was seaman on board the _Alert_ for four years, and was in
her after she was altered and went to sea. I was not in her outside
the Heads. My experience of her was in the Bay. In heavy weather I
have seen the decks flooded, but never knew of any water going below,
either through gratings or pantry window. From what I knew of the
_Alert_, I would go anywhere in her. I thought her a good strong boat.
Cross-examined by Mr. Box: I remember the _Alert_ in the Bay taking a
very large quantity of water on board. The engines had to be slowed
down because the seas came over. I can’t remember if the fires were
nearly put out on that occasion. She was not in very much trouble.
The pantry window was a round glass in a wooden frame. It had a
wooden slide in front outside that covered it right over. I am in the
_Excelsior_ now, but I an not mixing up her pantry window with the
_Alert’s_. I never noticed how it was fastened inside. When I left
the _Alert_, two years ago, I have been in the _Excelsior_ ever since.
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