The Sun.
London, England, 1864-03-24 00:00:00

The Wreck of the Desert Flower.

OFFICIAL REPORT.
TO THE LORDS OF THE COMMITTEE or PRIVY COUNCIL

FOR TRADE.

My Lords,—l b.g to report that I have held an official
inquiry, assisted by Captains Harris and Cow, into the cir-
cumstances attending the loss of the ship Desert Flower on
the morning of March 4, which took place on the Long
Bank, off the coast of Ireland, in the vicinity of Wexford.
The Desert Flower was a new ship, on her first voyage,
bound from Liverpool to Calcutta, laden entirely with coal.
She was built in St. John, N. 8., in the year 1863, regi•tered
at Liverpool of the burthen of 1,216 tons, owned by Messrs
Ryland and Seddons, of that part, and was commanded by
Mr Wm. J. Harvey, who held a certificate of service, which
certificate was lost at the same time as the ship. The De-
sert Flower left Liverpool at noon on the 2d of this present
month, and was towed 45 miles SW and by W from Holy-
head, where shs was cast off by the tug at 1 p,m. on the 3d
inst. Sail was made, and the ship proceeded down the Irish
Channel, steering SW by W k W, with a south-easterly
wind. At 7 p.m. the samu day the Taskar Light was made,
bearing about WSW, or half a point on the starboard or lee
bow, at a distance of two miles. The ship was then tacked,
and stood off the land, heading about NE till near midnight.
At this time she was wore round towards the land, and
headed SW and by V/ # W, or WSW, going about
three and a half knots an hour. At 1 a.m. the captain, for
the first time, ordered a cast of the lead to be taken, which,
after a little delay, in consequence of the lead-lice fouling,
gave 11 or 14. fathoms. This was quickly followed by ano-
ther cast in 10 fathoms. The master then went down to
consult his chart, but, before doing so, desired one of the
crew to ca►l all hands up about ship. Before the master
could return to the deck the ship struck heavily. Efforts
were made to back her off with the sails, which proved in-
effectual. Within 10 minutes five feet of water were found
in the well. The boats, all of which were stowed on board,
were got out safely, and most of the crew betook themselves
to them, leaving the master, chief and second mates,
steward, and two hands on board. The tide, which was at
that time flood, drifted the boats from the ship towards the

shore. At daylight, or about (.3 a.m., all the boats returned
to the ship and took off the master and the remainder of the
crew. When they left, the ship was full of water, and had
heeled over to port, or seawards. Shortly after leaving the
ship the longboat capsized in the rollers, and all hands
were thrown out. Six men succeeded in getting on the
bottom of the boat, and were taken cff by the captain in the
pinnace, but the chief mate and carpenter were drowned.
The boats subsequently landed at Rosslaer-house, South
Bay, near the entrance of Wexford River. In commenting
upon the circumstances of this disaster, I find that the
first error of the master consisted in his omission to heave
the lead as he stood off shore, that he might have thereby
verified his distance from the land at midnight before he
wore round and stood back towards the shoals on the Irish
coast. It is obvious that, had he done so, he would have
found that he was not so far off the coast as he supposed ; for
having stood off for 4 hours,and then returned upon a nearly
opposite course in one hour and five minutes, his ship was
wrecked in shore of the Tuskar Light. It is much to be re-
gretted that masters of ships will continue to neglect to use
the lead in passing up and down the Irish Channel, in spite
of frequent warnings, and notwithstanding that well-marked
oharts warn them of their danger. Had the lead been used
in time in this case this large and valuable ship would not
have been sacrificed, even taking into consideration the too
westerley course he was steering to round the Tuskar after
the tugboat cast her off. In pronouncing sentence upon the
master, I have taken into consideration his age and long
service, and refrained from cancelling his certificate of ser •
vice, and compelling him to go up for a certificate of compe-
tency; but have, with the concurrence of the Nautical
Assessors, suspended the certificate of Mr. William Joseph
Harvey for 12 calendar months from this date.--I have,
Sca.,

T. S. RAFFLES, Police Magistrate.
Liverpool, March 17, 1864.
We concur in this report.
H. HABILIS, Nautical Assessors.
JoHN Cow,

THE SHEFFIELD CALAMITY.

ADJOURNED INQUEST.

The inquest on the bodies of Thomas Elston and others
was resumed at the Town-hall yesterday.
The Coroner (Mr. J. Webster) conducted the inquiry.
Among those present were Mr. Robt. Rawlinson, C.E., and
Mr. Nathaniel Beardmore,:C,E., from the Home-office ; M.
Mille, member of the Legion of Honour, and engineer of
bridges and roads to the French Government; Mr. Robert
W. Mylne, E.C., F.R.S., of London; Mr. W. Lindley,
C.E. (London), engineer of the Hamburg Sewage and Water
Works; Colonel Ford, of York; Mr. Perrenet Thompson,
barrister, instructed by Messrs. A. Smith and Sons, solici-
tors to the Water Company ; and Mr. Wm. Smith, chair-
man of the Water Company, .

The Coroner, in opening the proceedings, 'said the jury
were met to inquire how Thomas Elston and others came
to their deaths on the 12th inst. He proposed only to direct
their attention to the death of Elston. Separate inquisi-
tions could afterwards be made with regard to the other
deceased without any particular inquiry. Having read the
evidence taken on the previous occasion, the coroner added
that the course he proposed to take was to examine the en-
gineer of the company first, in order to get as far as possible
a history of the embankment. If Mr. Leather could not
give all the information deemed necessary, he (the coroner)
would Examine Mr. Gunson, the resident engineer, Mr.
Craven, the contractor, and such other witnesses as might
be necessary. If their evidence was not satisfactory, he
would call Mr. Rawlinson, the Government inspector, and
one or two other witnessses who had been engaged in ex-
amining the reservoir, who would give their opinions upon
the cause of the disaster. That would be the most direct
way of getting at what they wished. He hoped to be able
to conclude the inquest that day, but if the witnesses were
not all examined by half-past five he would adjourn the
proceedings and resume the inquiry this day.
The following evidence was then adduced :
Mr. John Towlerton, Leather, Leventhorpe, near Leeds.
civil engineer, said—l am the consulting engineer of the
Sheffield Waterworks Company. I was consulted by the
company when they applied to Parliament for powers to
make the Bradfield reservoir. I prepared the plans and
specifications for its construction. That would be in the
year 1358. Parliamentary plans and sections were deposited
in 1852 for this and two other reservoirs, which we called
the Bradfield scheme. I examined the country generally
before depositing the plans, to see if water could be obtained.
The contract for the Bradfield reservoir was let, I think, in
1858. Originally the embankment was set out lower down
the valley than where it is executed. The first embankment
was never commenced, because it was found, on trial holes
being sunk, that there had been a disturbance of the strata.
I then altered my plans for the embankment to be where it
now is. I examined the ground before we commenced mak-
ing the embankment, and found it to be on the out crop of
the coal measures, and at the commencement of the mill-
stone grit. The strata consist first of soil, then clay, then
stone, then shale, with a gannister formation and a little
Goal in the centre of the valley. I had to deal with soil,
clay, stone, and shale in the embankment. The only spring
I ever saw in the valley was one on the site of the reservoir,
a little above the embankment. The first thing in forming
the embankment is to sink the puddle trench in the centre
of the base. The original plan provides for a puddle bank
about 10ft below the surface. In sinking a trench we did
not find a good foundation at that depth. It was not suffi-
ciently water tight. It was therefore necessary to sink until
we did get to a water tight foundation. We sank to a depth
varying from 10ft to 60ft, and then got a water tight foun-
dation. A good deal of water came into the puddle trench
during the working. We got rid of it by pumping. I do not
remember what powers the contractor had to pump the
water. I came to see the trench, I think twice. I came when
I was wanted. I walked over the bottom of the trench when it
was finished, and knew it was water-tight. I am not aware
that in wet weather the quantity of water in the trench was
so great tkat they could not pump it down. I saw the
puddle trench in 1861, and in 1863 I saw the puddle wall.
I did not see the puddling of the trench in its progress—at
all events not at the lowest point. I did not see the whole
of the puddle, but what I did see was well put in, and the
work was good. The water was not cut off altogether from
the trench. The trench simply divided the watercourses.
The water came into the trench so long as it was open. The
bottom of the trench was impervious, but the sides were
pervious. The water was not got rid of, but blocked out by
the puddle, as is usual. When, therefore, the puddle wall
got to a certain height there would be water against it on
the upper side. The water that would get through the rock
to the puddle wall would not have a tendency to injure it.
The object of a puddle wall is to keep out water, and there-
fore water is always against it in a reservoir. The water
rises against the puddle wall, but does not percolate through
it. The water was not let off by auy natural means ; if it
had the puddle wall would not be perfect. As the puddle
wall was being constructed, the water rose with it, and was
c irried away. The embankment across the ♦alley is 418
yards long. It is 500 ft. wide at the base and 12ft. at the top.
The inner slope is 21 to 1, and the outer slope the same.
The greatest height is 9 At. The puddle is 4ft. wide at the
top, and gets wider by lin. at every foot in depth. Thus,

_ .
supposing the puddle wall is 95ft. high, it will be 16ft. wide

at the base. There is 60ft. of puddle below the surface, mak-
ing the total depth of the puddle wall 155 ft. The reservoir

would c)ntiin a little ovz.r 114,000,000 cubic feet of water.
The surface area of water was about 78 acres. The area of
the gathering ground is about 43,000 acres. We got the

material fur making the embankment from the inside of
the reservoir, and in doing so laid bare the rocks. In

some places we got a good deal of stone. The embankment
is made of stone, clay, shale, and earth. I cannot say how
the material was put in. Mr. Gunson was not my servant,
He was the resident engineer. Ile had the superintendence

of the works, and occasionally consulted with me. He could
not deviate from my plans. There are two IS-inch pipes
from the inside to the outside of the reservoir underneath
the embankment. The pipes are abeut 500 ft long, made up
of lengths of Oft. There would be 55 or 56 lengths. They
are joined with sockets and lead in the ordinary way. They
are laid in a trench 911 below the surface of the ground.
They are wrapped round with clay puddle to the thickness
of, I think, 15 inches, the trench being then filled in. The
pipes are laid obliquely, not diagonally, across the embank-
ment in a straight line. The valves are at the lower end of
the pipe, outside the embankment If one of the pipes were to
buret in the centre it would be difficult to get to it to repair it.
It would have to be reached by excavations. An instance of
that kind occurred in the great dam at Crookes. The pipes
were originally of wood. I removed them by excavating,
and substituted iron pipes, They would be 30 years ago.
The breaking up of one of those pipes would most likely cause
serious damage to the embankment. The embankment might
possibly fall before we could find out the damage; I can't
tell what might happen. I never knew an instance of that.
'I he pipes were made of double the usual strength. I should
think there could not be au unequal pressure upon the pipes
from the embankment. Being laid in the solid ground,
the weight above could do no harm, unless it was a crush-
ing pressure. There would not be an unequal pressure
upon the pipes so as to raise them at any of the joints or
cause them to leak. We can insure a suffici nt ( quality of
material along the whole length of the pipes, for all practi-
cal purposes. The Water Company have other dams
constructed on the same principle which have been in
operation a great number of years. Possibly water from
the sources blocked up in filling the puddle trench
might get into the pipo trench. If it did it would show
itself. If water got in below the puddle trench it might
be dangerous; if above, it would not. It would show
itself by percolating to the lower end. Water-mains
in streets do not often give way under external pressure.
I never knew one break or yield at the joint from external
pressure.

Mr• Rawlinson—ls it not a common thing for a new line
of mains to have blemished joints and leak?
Mr. Loather—The pipes of the company are severely
tested before they are put down.
Mr. Rawlinson—l saw the testing apparatus, but never-
theless the question is a proper ens. * My experience is that
they do give way.
Mr. Leather—My experience on the contrary is, that they
scarcely ever do give way.
Examination of Mr. Leather by the Coroner resumed—l
never heard of a pipe giving way on account of water creep-
ing along the pipe trench. Ido not know there was such a
ease at Birmingham, It would not have been better to Iwo