Mr.

C. A. Kent.

480. Then I am afraid we could not get with any accuracy the exact cost of the service in dealing with them, if I may use than expression, because dealing 27 April 1894. would include not only towing or removing but also searching ?-It might be done with some labour. We might trace the proceedings of the vessels. Say a vessel went out on a fruitless errand, we could find out how long she was engaged on it, and then work out the cost of coal and stores which she consumed, or charge for her time according to the tariff I have already referred to.

481. Could you do that in the case of floating dere. licts only, without the case of sunken wrecks ?-Yes, I think we could do that. To make it a fair account of the cost to the Trinity House, the cost of the proceedings in searching should be added.

482. Will you endeavour to make out that?—Yes, I think we can do that. As to the nationality of the vessels, I might mention, perhaps, that of those 548 wrecks dealt with up to March 1893, 144 were unknown, wrecks. The number of vessels that are lost and are not identified seems incredible.

483. (Chairman.) I should like to ask this as to these floating derelicts. Can you tell us what they are as a rule, or what the majority of cases are, what class of vessels ?-A great many are timber ships.

484. From Norway I suppose?-Yes, that is in the North Sea chiefly.

485. I gather from what you have told us that nearly all the derelicts, or a great proportion of the derelicts which are dealt with are in the North Sea, the larger proportion-Yes. We have more wreckage to deal with on the East Coast than on any other; that is, in our Yarmouth and Ramsgate and London districts. In the English Channel the wrecks are chiefly collision cases.

486. But as to the timber ships in the North Sea, can you give us any idea why they become derelicts; are they abandoned?-They generally fall in with bad weather, get water-logged, and capsize, I understand.

487. What becomes of the crew as a rule ?-In many cases they are lost with all hands, but sometimes they are taken off by fishing boats.

488. (Mr. Trevor.) Is that ascertained as a fact, or is it only a matter of opinion?-It is a matter of opinion that the vessel is capsized after being water-logged.

489. But as to the loss of the crew?-I am informed that a certain number of crews are taken to Hull and the Northern ports, being rosened by fishing boats, but some are not brought ofl.

490. (Chairman.) You report a large number of cases where you have sent to search for derelicts but have not been able to find them?-Yes.

491. Is that due, do you suppose, to their having sunk or to actual difficulty in identifying the place?-One cause of this is the vagueness of the reports received. The reports are so very vague that they do not state the time of day when the wrecks were seen, and do not state the locality precisely, and in fact give very few particulars; and then, besides, such an interval has clapsed in a great many cases from the time when the vessel was sighted to the time of our receiving the

news. It is a very extraordinary thing that we hear of wrecks which seem very formidable, yet which cannot be found, which are never heard of again, and which do not seem to turn up anywhere.

42. But notwithstanding this large amount of derelicts which exists off the East Coast of England, you have never yet heard of any steamer or ship actually being wrecked or damaged to any material extent through coming into contact with them?-A smack was sunk about a month or six weeks ago, having struck a floating derelict off the mouth of the Humber. That is the only one. I do not remember any reports of that kind; nothing on a large scale at ail

events.

493. It has been stated that there is a very great danger to life and property from all these floating derelicts, but as a matter of fact, I think I understand you to say that this has been very much exaggerated, or, so far as the North Sea is concerned, it scarcely exists ?Yes, I think I may say that, and I think the number of derelicts reported is not the actual number existing. I think that we have received reports in different forms relating to the same vessel. Perhaps three derelicts may be reported, but they are one and the same vessel seen at different places at different times. That would appear to be the case from the study of these reports. If the report is a vague report and an ancient one, and if their lighthouse work is pressing them very much at the time, the Trinity House have to consider whether it is worth while taking any steps in the matter.

494. And it may be even a necessity that some days elapse before you are able to deal with them ?-Yes.

495. How many vessels have you got employed in your waters? We have got nine steam vessels employed in lighthouse duty. We have a smaller steam vessel which conveys supplies of oil to the lighthouses. 496. But you have actually nine vessels ?-Nine steam vessels and one sailing vessel.

497. Which can be employed?-Which can be employed.

498. That is, when they can be spared from their proper duty?—Yes, when they can be spared.

499. These are all round the coast?-All round the coast.

500. (Sir George Nares.) Of England ?-Of England and Wales. But some of these vessels are hardly powerful enough to deal with difficult cases of wreck

501. Are there any instructions given to the master not to destroy important evidence as to any crime that might have been committed on board a vessel before abandoning her ?-No, there is no such instruction.

502. No special instruction ?-No special instruction. 503. You leave it to their own judgment ?-To their own judgment.

504. (Mr. Trevor.) For instance, if a vessel has been scuttled are there any instructions to search for evidence?-Unless we had been told to see to that we should not think of it.

505. And it is not likely you would have been told? -No.

'Mr. B. Thomas.

506. (Chairman.) I think you are the Marine Superintendent of the Cunard Line, are you not ?-Yes.

507. You, no doubt, have made many voyages ?—Yes. I have been 12 or 13 years crossing the Atlantic at various times.

508. Will you tell us of any cases of derelicts within your own experience?-In the case of the "Tarifa" on November 9th, 1886, we were entering the Channel on this side; I was the officer in charge of the deck; I was chief officer. We ran into a derelict vessel bottom up. The wind was abeam; she was laying the same way as ourselves and we could not possibly see her. She was only a few feet above water and we ran into the stern. I was on the bridge at the time, and the first intimation we had of it was that the ship was brought up all standing going full speed. thought something had gone wrong with the propeller, and then the look out reported something under the bow,

We

the vessel was stopped and reversed, and we gradually saw this wreck floating to windward of us.

509. What was the effect on the ship?-We put her in the graving-dock. There was no harm done. Laying the same way as ourselves, fore and aft, we had gone into her stern into the soft part of her so that we had dore no damage.

510. But if on the other hand you had taken her on the broadside what would have been the consequence? -We should have smashed our bows in, I think. She was timber-laden and afterwards we got some record of her. The vessel had been capsized in a squall and the crew saved.

511. But from your own experience you have never known as an actual fact of any damage?-No, I have not. I have seen five altogether in my experience. I believe afterwards tug-boats were sent out for that one

which I have mentioned, and it was run into port some. where.

512. Then the next one ?-In the next case I was chief officer of the "Cephalonia" in 1888, and we saw an abandoned vessel called the "W. L. White," of Rockland. We went along-side of her and found her decks were all broken in and the stumps of her masts standing, but she was perfectly tight evidently. In looking at the American pilot-chart at the time I found that this vessel had been dismasted and abandoned on the American coast somewhere off Cape Hatteras. She was reported all that summer by various vessels crossing the Atlantic, and eventually she was found one morning on the coast of Scotland in one of the bays of the Orkney Isles.

513. Was she timber laden ?-Yes, she had been, but it was all washed out. They call it lumber in America. The "W. L. White" of Rockland was reported frequently.

514. Are there records existing of the dates when abandoned and wheu found in Scotland ?-There must be some records because it was all in the papers at the time. With regard to the next vessel, when we saw it I was in command of one of our steamers, the " Palmyra." We passed a vessel bottom up. That was in 1889 in the Atlantic on the Spanish coast away farther south.

515. Off Cape St. Vincent ?-50 miles northward of Cape St. Vincent, well out to sea. It was right in the track of vessels going down south, but it was day time when I saw her.

516. Did you ever hear of her again --No, I never heard of her again. It was heavy weather at the time, and no doubt she broke up very shortly and went to pieces. 517. And you did nothing more ?-Ne, went on. 518. Then you have got another one I think?—The next one was in the Mediterranean, 15 miles north-west of Cape Carbon. We passed the wreck of a vessel which was 70 feet long and about 30 feet wide and it had on it a pilot house and wheel attached. We went close to to see if there was anybody alive on her, but no one was there.

519. (Mr. Trevor.) What date was that ?-September 24th, 1890.

529. (Chairman.) Do you think it possible she might have broken up on the shore?-I should imagine it was the result of a collision.

521. Supposing pieces of wreck are run into, do you think that anyone would be any the worse?-Taking into account the class of boats that we have on the Atlantic, first class, it would not do any damage, but to the ordinary tramp it certainly would, I should say-to the ordinary vessels.

522. You take into consideration the class of vessel it meets with ?—Yes, certainly.

523. Then you sighted another one in 1891, did you not? Yes, in the Atlantic Ocean, west of the Bay of Biscay in 45 lat. N., 8° 27' long. W. This was the wreck of a wooden vessel, and the stem and fore-foot were 12 feet above water. They are all dangerous to shipping, but it certainly would depend on the class of vessel that struck them. With a large full powered vessel, strong forward, they would possibly go over them, I think, but if you have not got a strong bow and the vessel was going eight knots, and was only a shell of a vessel, it would probably knock her bow in.

524. As a matter of fact, have you any information about this occurring to ships ?-I have asked a number of captains since I heard there was an inquiry into the matter, and I am surprised to find how very few there are who know anything about it. You ask Have you seen a derelict." Two or three say they have; "Čan you place them ?" "No, we cannot." Then after a little thought they would be able to place one back 12 or 15 years. I am about the only one man I have ever come across who has ever struck one. It is surprising how very few going across the Atlantic have seen them.

525. There is an impression about, that a great deal of loss of life and property occurs from the number of derelicts there are especially in the North Atlantic?—I do not think that is so.

526. As far as I can make out, we have found no authenticated case of any damage to life or property. Could you tell us of any ?-No. We have no record in the Cunard Company, in my day, of any other vessel except mine striking one. I believe there is a

legend that the "Russia" many years ago did strike one, but I do not know of it of my own personal knowledge, nor have I found any one who could say it occurred except by report.

527. Then it is not a well authenticated case?—No. 528. Now have you any experience of striking ice ?No, I have not. I have been amongst it often enough, but I have never struck it.

529. It seems to me that ice is a much more real danger. What do you say?-A thousand times mcre dangerous than a derelict. That is my opinion of course, and the opinion of the main class in the Atlantic.

530. Holding the position you do, you would be sure to hear of not only accidents to your own line but accidents to all other lines?-Yes we should hear at once about it.

531. And yet I gather you have heard of no authenticated case of any ship coming to grief through collision with a derelict?-No, the only danger that I see of derelicts is not on the ocean, it is on making land on either side. Where they get into the track of vessels nearing the coast there are so many vessels passing in a limited space that they might collide there. The danger would be greater on either side, but with a vessel in the middle of the Atlantic, it is not so. This vessel the 'W. L. White," although she was right in the track from one side to the other, was never struck.

532. You have got a great deal of practical experience, and it is suggested it would be desirable to have one or more vessels kept constantly in the Atlantic looking for derelicts. Do you think that is a practical sugges tion ?--I do not think it is practicable, I do not think they would find them. Take for instance a stationary buoy; even when you have the latitude and longitude, it is very difficult to pick up; how much more so with an object drifting with the current and winds. I think it might be weeks probably before you would pick J up.

533. It has also been suggested that these vessels should display at night an electric light from the masthead on the supposition that any steamer passing would communicate with that vessel, to inform them of any derelicts they may happen to have come across in the course of their voyage. Do you think that any steamer or line of steamers would do that-I am afraid you would not get a mail boat to stop to do that, when every minute is of importance. and they are breaking the record. The only danger would be on either side, for instance round the coast of Ireland, or on the Atlantic coast of America, within a few hundred miles of the land. Then they could do something, they could localise the derelict, but on the ocean they could not. If I may make a suggestion as to vessels crossing, if the slower class of vessels, in which time is not such an important object as with a mail boat, were given a bonus when they had destroyed a derelict it might do a great deal of good.

534. But do you think derelicts are sufficiently numerous to make it worth while ?-I do not think they are sufficiently numerous to employ a vessel specially for it on the ocean. But I think if an outside vessel that has time to stop did come across one and could destroy it, and the remuneration was sufficient for the captain and the crew to do so, I think they would stop and destroy it by losing five or six hours.

535. But is it not a very difficult thing to destroy a derelict unless you are specially provided for that purpose? -If you had a charge of dynamite you could soon do it.

536. I do not know whether they can carry dynamite. Then again it has also been stated, that in the case of these lumber ships if you are able to destroy the hull you free a large number of baulks of timber, which add very much to the danger?-I do not think so, because taking the case of the great raft that was towed down from the Bay of Fundy on its way to New York, consisting of something like 10,000 to 20,000 baulks of timber, which were lashed together and made into a cigar-shaped vessel, it was towed towards New York, and on its way it broke adrift, and all those baulks of timber were supposed to be scattered over the Atlantic, which they were. We got great warning at the time about the danger to navigation they would cause. I crossed at the time and every other week I was on the Atlantic crossing; I do not think I saw a dozen baulks. I did hear of one vessel which had got amongst a quantity of them, that is all.

570. Are they Cunard captains ?-Yes.

you

571. Have had any conversation with them upon this subject ?-No; there is not one there that I have spoken to upon it.

572. And you cannot tell us what their motives or reasons are for asking Government to destroy these derelicts ?-They believe that derelicts are a danger. No doubt in their own minds they consider it a great source of anxiety, especially when one has been reported. I know as a master that if a ship comes into Liverpool and a derelict is reported on our track there is a wire out to New York or Boston from the Liverpool office to the agent informing him "Derelict seen on the track in such and such a position; be careful."

573. Does that result in a more vigilant look out ?— I cannot say more vigilant, but we are more anxious. We cannot be more vigilant than we are.

574. Supposing you were in command of a vessel with orders to destroy a derelict and you came across one of these timber ships such as you describe, what would you do?-I should lower a boat and go to her.

575. And what then?-I suppose if you gave such orders you would make some provision for power to destroy them.

576. But I am supposing you have all the powers you ask for; what powers would you ask for and what powers would you use ?-You would have to give them an explosive charge of some sort.

577. Would that sink a vessel or merely burst her? --You would burst everything; you could not get them to sink of course.

578. Then as regards burning, would it be possible to burn a floating water-logged timber ship -I do not think so.

579. You do not think she would burn?-No.

580. (Chairman.) I think out of the five derelicts that you yourself have seen, only three were in the Atlantic routes ?-Three were in the Atlantic routes.

581. One was in the Mediterranean, and one off Cape St. Vincent?-Yes, and they were in even a more frequented route than the Atlantic, I mean in the route of all the Indian steamers going through the Canal.

582. I think I asked you whether you had ever heard of any vessel being wrecked or damaged by ice?—Yes, I have heard frequently of it; I said I had not been myself. There are frequent records of vessels coming to grief with ice.

583. Are you of opinion that the ice is of far more danger than a derelict ?—Yes, there is no comparison.

584. Do you not think it is very likely that many of the accidents that are reported by ships which receive damage are due to ice rather than to wreckage or derclicts?-I should not like to venture an opinion upon that. We have had ships damaged by ice I know, and ships on the Atlantic are frequently damaged by ice; that we know. We have plenty of records of that if they are looked up. You will remember the case of the Arizona," which was one of the crack boats before all these later racers came out-she ran into one, and had to be put into St. John's Newfoundland because in broad daylight she ran into ice, and it was on a fine day too.

66

585. It is very difficult to see ice I suppose ?-Of course you can see it very nicely on a fine day, but that is not the sort of day you have always got to navigate in. I put no faith in the change of temperature. I have gone between two icebergs and there has been no reduction of temperature at all.

586. It is a popular idea that there is nevertheless? -We have every quarter of an hour in the vicinity of ice to take the temperature, but I have never found it much of a guide.

587. (Mr. Trevor.) When you mentioned 10 voyages a year as the average, do you mean out and home?Yes, I have not made 10 voyages a year on the Atlantic. Of course I have been to other places; our service varies. 588. But when you speak of a voyage you mean out and home ?-Yes, we call the other a passage,

589. (Chairman.) You are the Trinity House Superintendent?-Yes, of the Yarmouth district.

590. We understand that you have been employed in removing and destroying derelicts?—Yes.

591. Will you give us your experience of any vessels that you have dealt with ?-The first case I will take will be that of a vessel called the "Evangeline" of Swansea. She was a vessel of about 700 tons, and was found floating bottom up after a collision.

592. (Mr. Trevor.) When ?-In 1883. She was about eight miles to the north-west of the North Hinder Lightship. We found her, and we first of all tried to make a hole in her to get a charge in. We expended about 105 lbs. of powder in making a hole in the bottom. Finding she was a good vessel we made an attempt to tow her towards the English Coast, and after having her in tow for about 19 hours the wind freshened and we could not keep the vessel's head to sea; it kept paying off. Finding we could not do anything further with her we passed the hawser with which we had been towing forward to the bow, and rode by her till the weather moderated, and then finding we should have to go into Ramsgate for coal and explosives, we engaged an Ostend fisherman to make fast to the wreck and show a light at night till we returned. On our return we proceeded with the dispersing of the wreck. The time we were actually employed in that work was about 29 working hours, but they extended over several days, We had to go into Ramsgate twice for explosives and coal, and the work altogether extended from the 23rd August to the 31st August. The quantity of cottonpowder expended was 1,280 lbs. We actually dispersed

her in that time.

: 593. (Chairman.) I should like to ask you one or two questions upon that. How do you use the explosive P-We call it tonite, or cotton-powder. I believe it is the same thing.

594. How do you explode those charges?-In the case of floating wreckage we have to get on the wreck to do it, and after making a hole we put the charge inside and light the fuse and pull away from the vessel.

595. A time fuse ?-Yes, a time fuse; we cannot use the insulated wire on account of the timber, it would fly pretty well a quarter of a mile.

596. How do you carry the explosives in your own ships-We have a special magazine for that purpose. 597. Then I gather from what you say that apart from the time occupied in the actual dispersion of the wreck, there is time lost or occupied in going backwards and forwards for coals and explosives P-Twentynine hours we took actually in dispersing her.

598. Which, of course, covers several days ?—Yes. 599. Then I may assume from that that the work of dispersing a wreck is very difficult?—Yes.

1600. And it took considerable time?-Yes, we were disturbed by weather in this case for several hours. I see on one occasion we actually had to leave off for some time.

601. You say the operations covered the period from the 23rd to the 31st August--eight days ?-Yes.

602. Was the vessel loaded ?--No. she had been in ballast. The collision happened at the entrance of the Straits of Dover, or somewhere there, and she was run down and seems to have shot her ballast out of her bow; her bow was greatly damaged, and then she floated and drove over 8 miles N.W. of the North Hinder Lightship. On this occasion we hired an Ostend fishing boat to show lights. The next time we went in wo despatched a steamer which was stationed at Ramsgate to take our place, and to lie by the wreck till we got back, but she had to abandon the wreck on account of bad weather; she could not stay-that was one of our own steamers.