'The Board of Trade inquiry into the awreck.of the' Nepaul held before Mr. BR. H. B. Marsham, with Captain Brooks and Captain Cosens as assessors, was coucluded on the 16th of January." The first day Captain Brady and his officers were examined, and Dr, Raikes put in the gestions on which the Board of Trade lesited the opinion of the Court. The following were the second day's proceedings, from which it will be seen that the Court showed no undue lenity to Captain Brady of the P. and 0. Company, called as a Captain J. C. Almond, nautical inspector
witness to character for the captain, aald it was part of his own duty to make himself thoroughly acquainted with the character and experience of the officers of the com-Captain Brady bad been in the employ of the company twenty-six years, and during that time he had never met with an accident. His character for trustworthines, care, and experience in navigation was the highest that a man could bear. The company had thorough and unbounded confidence in him.
Sir Charles Hall, in the course of his address to the Court, submitted that there were absolutely no grounds for charging stranding in fact due, as the result the captain with negligence, and that the proved, to an excess of caution on tried all he knew to obtain the assistance of pilot, and was greatly misled owing to numerous fishing boats showing the same lights as pilot vessels. At about 7.35 he saw a flashing light away to the eastward, which he had reason to suspect was his pilot boat waiting for him; and, having
his engines, and turned hie anip toward light on Plymouth breakwater, he stopped viously made what he thought was the
But on subsequently sighting a buoy which was not expected he put his engines slow ahead under a hard-a-port helm, with tt intention of taking the ship out to sen aga been less cautious, and gone at full speed instead of slow, there could be lit! doubt. that she would have cleared rocks. Owing, however, to the engin woing slow the effect of the port helm was jess speedy, and the ship took the ground.
The Court found that the alterations in
a fleet of fishing boats being both to port the helm consequent upon Passing through and starboard did not affect the course. No measures were taken to ascertain and verify the position of the vessel when alight thought to~be the breakwater light was observed. When the flashing light was observed the measures executed were not proper. The position of the vessel not. being accurately known, her headway should have been stopped. Proper measures were not taken for the safety of the ship when the object thought to be " buoy was sighted. The Court did not attribute the loss of ti vessel to the lead not having been used earlier. A good look-out was kept. The stranding was caused by the master continuing to proceed in very dark and misty weather in the direction of the shore after soundings obtained had warned him of ips proximity to danger, and by hi promptly and completely stopping the h way of the ship when a buoy was sighted on the port bow.- The vessel was not navigated with proper and seamanlike care after sighting what the master took to be the breakwater light. The master was alone in default, and the Court suspended his certificate for six months. The Court also expressed its opinion that great credit was due to the captain, officers, and crew for what was done after the stranding, for the discipline preserved, fur the great care that seemed to have been taken of the pass rigers, for the prompt way in which they were Innded, snd for the manner in which the baggage and a large part of the cargo were saved. The Court regretted that it'felt compelled to suspend the certi ficate of the master after his long and unbroken career of creditable conduct.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.