The Sun.
London, England, 1859-11-26 00:00:00

WRECK OF THE ROYAL CHARTER.

LIVERPOOL, FRIDAY.

This investigation was resumed to-day, in St. •
George's Hall, Liverpool, before Mr. Mansfield and
Captain Harris, R.N.
The following is the evidence adduced after our
despatch left on Thursday evening :
Mr. William Gilmour was next called. He said
—I was for two years surgeon of the Royal:Charter,
but was not ou board her during the last voyage.
I have written a letter to the Liverpool Mercury,
which has been copied into the London papers,
giving my opinion as to the seaworthiness of the
vessel, and other matters.
Mr. O'Dowd—Do you still adhere to the state-
ments contained in that letter addressed to the
Mercury about the vessel ?
Witness—Well, I may have exaggerated a little
as to the working of the deck, but I have seen the
boards work up and down.
By Mr. Aspinall—l did not exaggerate in the
whole of my statements, and I still think she
vibrated like a " fishing-rod," and I left her on that
account. I did not tell the owners or any other
persons about this at the time.
Mr. Aspinall then read a letter of resignation
written by Mr. Gilmour to Messrs. Gibbs, Bright,
and Co., soliciting a berth at some future period, in
ease he did not succeed in his profession, and wish-
ing every success to the two splendid ships Great
Britain and Royal Charter.
Mr. Aspinall—Did you mean what you stated
when you wrote that letter ?
Mr. Gilmour—That is another question.
Mr. Aspinall—Then you did not mean it ?
Mr. Gilmour—l cannot say.
Mr. Aspinall—Did you mean what you said
when you wrote this letter to the Liverpool Mer-
cury?
Mr. Gilmour—Yes, with the exception of the
" pianoforte."
Mr. Aspinall—Your statement is not exag-
gerated when you say you heard the rivets
rattling ?
Mr. Gilmour—No.

Mr. Aspinall here read another letter written
by Mr. Gilmour to Messrs. Bright and Co.,
dated Aylesbury, Aug. 22, 1858, in which the fol-
lowing passages occur :—" Will you inform me if
the Royal Charter sails on the 16th inst., as for-
merly advertised, or if the sailing is postponed,
having seen an advertisement of the kind
am highly delighted to see by the London Press
several letters from passengers who went out with
us in the highest praise of the old ship."
Mr. Aspinall, to the witness—You wrote that
paragraph about Frederick Foster, the orphan,
who is dead.
Mr. Gilmour—Yes.

Mr. Aspinall—Do you think it was right, or
that you were acting like a Christian or a gentle-
man, when you wrote that paragraph ?
Mr. Gilmour—l do not answer that.
Mr. Aspinall—Do you not think it was a wilful
and gratuitous libel ?
Mr. Gilmour—lt was not a libel.
Mr. Aspinall—Nobody else thought it right to
say so of an orphan boy after he was dead. It was
true, then ?
Mr. Gilmour—l have said nothing but what was
true. What has that to do with the inquiry ?
Mr. O'Dowd—As a professional man, how do
you account for the manifest contradiction between
the letter addressed to Messrs. Gibbs, Bright, and
Co., in which you call the vessel a " splendid ship,"
and your experience during those two voyages ?
s Mr. Gilmour—l say during the two former voy-
ages I had confidence in her. She was splendid
internally.
Mr. Aspinall—Would you have ventured to
write that paragraph about Frederick Foster if he
had not been an orphan ?
Mr. Gilmour—Yes, or about you either.
Mr. O'Dowd—When that letter was written, in
which you call the vessel a "splendid ship," did
you contemplate on having to call again upon
Messrs. Gibbs, Bright, and Co., for employment as
a medical man ?
Mr. Gilmour—lt was merely as a compliment to
the owners. By the word " splendid" I meant the
decorations.
Mr. O'Dowd—You may stand down.
Mr. George Barber said he was one of the
shipwright surveyors for the Board of Trade,
and had considerable experience in that depart-
ment. He had examined the Royal Char-
ter on four separate occasions, but had only
granted her a passenger declaration once, which
was in May, 1857, when he felt that she was quite
sufficient for the purpose intended. In May, 1859,
he examined her bottom only, when he was struck
with her excellent appearance. He observed two
butts which appeared to be slack, but on examina-
tion one only was found to be slack, the rust having
got round their heads.
By Mr. Aspinall—After a very careful exami-
nation, both in May, 1857, and May, 1859, ho was
satisfied that the ship was well qualified to carry
passengers. If a ship was painted over, and lie
was satisfied in other respects, he was bound to
grant a declaration. It was not the duty of the
surveyor to examine the quality of the iron. Wit-
ness had a nephew on board, and having been to
the scene of the wreck he was of opinion that a
wooden vessel of the same dimensions would have
gone to pieces as readily as the Royal Charter. He
felt more interest in the ship in consequence of his
nephew being on board.
Mr. James Martyn, one of the surveyors for the
Liverpool Underwriters' Association, said he sur-
veyed the Royal Charter in conjunction with the
previous witness, with whose evidence as to the
strength and soundness of the ship he entirely con-
curred. He gave a declaration for the ship on the
11th of May of this year.
Shortly before six o'clock the inquiry was fur-
ther adjourned to one to-day.
William Foster, carpenter, was recalled by Mr.
Mansfield. He said—There was about six inches
of water in the vessel after she struck on the sand.
After that I asked the engineer about her, and the
engineer said she was all right. I did not sound
her after she struck on the rocks. The cargo con.
sisted of hides and wool, copper ingots, and gold.
There were about 45 tons of copper. When we left
Melbourne she was drawing 18 feet 5 inches for-
ward, and 20 feet 6 inches aft.
Captain Wm. Martin was next examined by Mr.
Aspinall—l am marine superintendent for Messrs.
Gibbs, Bright, and Co., also for the Australian
Steam Navigation Company. It was my duty to
superintend the Royal Charter after each voyage.
I also superintended the building of her, along with
Mr. Patterson. I confirm Mr. Patterson in every-
thing he said with reference to the care that was
taken in the building of her. There was no expense
saved, but we all worked hard to make her a good
ship. There were three best bowers on board—
Trotman's patent. One, 50 cwt. 241bs. • another,
501 cwt. lfilbs ; and the other 51 cwt. 181bs. There
were 300 fathoms of 21 inch bower cable. They
were proved at 72 tons each. They were supplied
by Messrs. Wood and Co., of Liverpool, and proved
at Chester. I was not present when they were
tested.

To Captain Harris—lt is not compulsory to have
chains up to a certain proof, either by the Admi-
ralty or Corporation. It is usual to take the builder's
test. Trotman's stream anchor of 15 cwt Iqr 101 b
had the full complemmt of cable. The price of the
bower anchors was 45s per cwt. The stream ancher
cost 36s per cwt. The cables cost 13s 6d per cwt.
It is not usual to carry the sheet anchor in the mer-
chant service. There would be a difficulty in such
a port as Liverpool.
To Mr. Aspinall—The chains and anchors were
of the usual strength in such ships. She wore in the
stay beautifully. I was on board the last voyage.
There were no repairs going on then. She proved
to have greater stability than we at first expected.
To Captain Harris—The Royal Charter was a
new class of vessel when she was built. She was
the largest auxiliary clipper I had then seen.
Judging from her construction, I thought it possi-
ble the would be crank. She was overloaded with
ballast before she put into Plymouth. She sailed
capitally. Her heavy or hard weather canvas was
all of No. 1 canvas. It was impossible for the helm
to be hard a-starboard for any length of time when
she had rounded the Skerries, as deposed by two
witnesses. I believe the witnesses were mistaken.
I went on one occasion in the Royal Charter as far
as the Tuskar, and it was blowing a heavy gale,
and I was surprised to find that she steamed so well
With so little power. We never made less than 31
knots an hour. No doubt the violence of the storm
that night would prevent her coming round for
some time. The masts were very nicely propor-
tioned. The reason why she would not stay on her
first voyage, before
reaching Plymouth, as described
by Dr. Scoresby, was because she was not then
in proper trim, and was too much by the head.
I have been 19 years at sea. What I think
guided Captain Taylor in not cutting away the
masts previously, was knowing that as soon as the
masts were cut away the screw would be stopped
by entanglement.
Captain Harris said the screw could have been
feathered, it being only a two-bladed one. His own
opinion was, if th masts had been cut away sooner,
all the lives would have been saved, the vessel rode
s ) gallantly for four
hours.
Captain Martin said it was a very dangerous pro-
cess to cut away the masts at such a time as that,
as the master of a vessel might defeat the very ob-
ject he had in view. The yard might strike the
vessel in a heavy sea, and, fifty chances to one,
knock one of her decks in.
Captain Harris—ln a light vessel it might be.
Captain Martin-,—A master would think a good ,