The Sun.
London, England, 1862-06-23 00:00:00

7,
‘;e.)

. - "-- - '.."--.-• - .
'.-4—• - - . .
. .
..., ..,.' • ..,..-e-tr,: i ' 1 4- s .
~ .. ~.14..„. ,
'3:4' 9,1'.'

I'RICE .4d.
STAMPED ....sd.

grate used in the barrack-rooms at Chatham and
other military stations, a notification has been ad-
dresed to General Sir J. F. Burgoyne, G.C.8., In-
spector-General of Fortifications, and to command-
ing Royal Engineers both at home and abrond
announcing that a committee has been appointeda;
the War-office to inquire into the preFent pattern
of barrack grates. Commanding Royal Engineers
are directed to give their attention to a consideration
of the suitability of the existing grates, in order
that they might be prepared, after the ensuing
winter, to assist the committee with their opinions,
with a view to the removal of every reasonable
objection. Commanding Royal Engineers are re-
quested to keep in view that any open fire grate
adopted in barrack-rooms must combine, in a man-
ner consistent with sanitary requirements, the two
essential objects of ventilation and economy of fuel.

OFFICIAL REPORT.

COLLISION.'-BARQUE STIRLINGSHIRE AND

PILOT CUTTER PRINCESS.
Greenwich Police Court, June 17, 1862.
My Lords,—ln compliance with your lordships'
instructions, I have, with the assistance of Captains
Harris and Scott, as Nautical Assessors, made in-
quiry into the case of the collision between the
barque Stirlingshire and the pilot cutter Princess on
the morning of the 22d of May last ; and I have the
honour to report to your lordships the evidence,
together with the opinions of the assessors and my-
self, as to the causes of the collision. The Stirling-
shire is a barque of 365 tons, and was commanded
by Charles John Grimmer, who holds a Board of
Trade certificate of competency, dated Ist May,
1851. The Princess is a pilot cutter of 51 tons, be-
longing to the Corporation of the Trinity-house,
and was commanded by Francis Atherden, who has
been 25 years in this service, and during five years
of that time in command of pilot cutters. The
collision occurred three or four miles S. and by W.
of Dover, about thirty minutes after midnight of
the 21st of May, and was attended with the very
serious consequences of the loss of two lives, besides
great damage to the cutter and the imminent peril
of all on board. The Stirlingshire was on her
voyage from Trinidad to London, ane was propeed•
ing up channel, under foresail, double reefed fore-
topsail, whole mainsail, and maintopgallantsail.
.
She had taken on board a Deal boatman off
Dungeness to bring her into the Downs, there being
no licensed pilot to be met with at that time. The
Princess was beating up to her station (the Eastern
Station) between Dover and Folkestone, having 14
Trinity pilots on board, in addition to her own crew
of six men, besides the master. The night was clear,
and the wind moderate, till about midnight, when
it became squally. About the time the collision
took place the barque, having previously taken
in her mainroyal, was in the act of clewing up
her maintopgallantsail, and the cutter, having pre-
viously taken a second reef in her mainsail, was in
the act of taking a reef in her foresail, having
hove to on the port tack, and lowered the sail for
that purpose. At this time the course cf the barque
was N.E. by E., the wind being W. by S., and the
cutter was heading N.W., westerly. The night,
though squally, with rain, was yet so far clear that
a ship's lights might have been seen from a half to
three quarters of a mile off. A collision under such
circumstances can only be accounted for by an ab-
sence of proper lights, or of a proper look -out on one
or both of the vessels, and several witnesses from
on board each of them have been examined as to this
point. Their evidence, as is customary in such cases,
is of a very contradictory nature. The master of
the barque, the second mate, and two apprentices,
and the Deal boatmen who were on board of her, all
agree in swearing that her side lights were in their
proper places, in the mizen rigging, and in proper
condition ; whilst, on the other hand, the master and
two seamen of the cutter, and three of the pilots,
all concur in swearing that they saw no side lights
in the barque, though they saw a bright light which
she was carrying on or under the cap of her bow-
sprit ; and they add, that as they get on board the
barque, between the main and mizen rigging on the
starboard side, from the cutter, they must, they
think, have seen a green light, had there been one
there. From this strong negative testimony, coupled
with the evidence of what was said by the master
of the barque in answer to observations made re-
specting his lights, it is impossible to give entire
credit to the statements of the crew of the barque
with regard to the state of the lights. It is admitted
that a short time before the collision the lights had
been taken into the deck-house to be trimmed, and
the probability is, that this was done just at the
time of the collision. At all events, no doubt can
exist in the mind of any one reading the evidence
en thin point that the side lights on board the
barque were not visible in the manner required by
the Admiralty:regulations, and that this neglect
directly tended to produce the collision, for which
the master of the barque is therefore responsible,
under the provisions of the statute, as for a wilful
default. It may be here observed, that under any
circumstances, the removal of the lamps for the
space of three or four minutes each, as is stated, for
the purpose of trimming them, thus leaving the ship
during that time without lights, is itself a neglect
of the Admiralty regulations and of the Statute,
and may be the cause of serious injury; nor can it
be said that carrying lights nearly on the gunwale,
in the mizen rigging, is a strict compliance with the
Admiralty regulations, as it is obvious that, so
placed, they cannot show a light " right a-head,”as
the beam of the vessel or some other object must
intervene. Besides the question of side lights, the
evidence evidence discloses two other subjects for animadver-
sionue
—viz., his carrying a bright light on
as to the conduct of the master he berg.
and the speed, " seven or eight knots
an
nist hourb at the
least," at which the vessel was going'
the collision. With regard to
his actartrhyeitnigniethoef
bright light, besides being, by the. 295th section of
£2O, is made a case of wilful
recetalyleuthlaetceadusteo
the Merchant Shipping Act, sudbejfeacutlttohay penalty of
section, in the event of its causing
evidence
sloosfsa.rTahsoutoght heevidence in this case hardly goon
esta-
blish that this bright light
was
sight
undoubtedly was di
erions evil, as, to a certain extent, it
ceolvleisriyons
he master of the cutter in this
seems to have misled t
opfr otdhuec
instance. The pilots do not appear to notice this
breach of the regulations as they ought to do. In-
stead of allowing it to be used as a signal for a
pilot, it may be advisable that the pilots should be
directed to point out the irregularity, and make an
entry in their log of the name of the ship, so that
the offence may be punished, or some other steps
taken to enforce the observance of the law. With
regard to the last point—vi •
z., the speed at which the
barque was proceeding—that is a purely nautical
question, and the opinion of the assessors upon it is
expressed in the following words of Capt. Harris :
—" Under the circumstances of wind, weather, and
position, his vessel being then off Dover, the master
was not justified—and not having a responsible pilot
on board—in proceeding through a pilot station, and
the track of vessels to and from the Downs, with his
ship under so little command, that when a light is
seen he was unable to avoid a collision. He might
have proceeded under easy sail, and might have
rounded too for a pilot. He neglected these pre-
cautions, and incurs, consequently, the responsibi-
lities of his act." In conformity with this opinion,
in which I fully concur, I am justified in pronounc-
ing that the improper speed at which
the barque
flag time of
suffered to proceed before and at the
was directly
the collision, was a default of the master
se
of
life.
contributing to the results of damage and
r oceedings
In conclusion, I trust remark that thteo
phave been
part of the cutter appear
on the exposed as the
entirely free from blame, and that,
constant risk
persons engaged in this service are o
• ' ed by the imprudence
of being run down or mills
or inattention of those in charge of vessels in
Place themselves in order
whose track they must