The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1870-04-01

|
ship RocEclin. Among those present attending
| upon the proceedings we're Sir Harry ParEes. the
British Minister to Japan; Captain Stanhope,
Hon c. f. DeLons United states Munster 10 70
survivors of the Oneida; the United States consul
! and consulate attaches, and anuln1er of Ameri.
can and Russian officers
CAPTAIN EYRE PROTESTS
Captain Eyre demanded to know If any cri-
| dcnce that he or any other person would give
could hereafter be used iu any proceeding against
| him. and on being Informed that such evidence
could be used, he demanded that any specific
charge might he made IN writing, and that lie
might have the assistance of Mr. Barnard as
counsel. He then formally protested against The
court entertaining any charges against him, and
also objected TO its jurisdiction. debate then
ensueu between Mr.. Barnard, who was admtfted
| rs counsel for Captain Eyre, and Minister De
| Long, on the subject Of the powers Of the court,
the former Insisting thati could only inquire Into
the collision, and the latter that 1t possessed the
| power OF Furnishing Captain Eyre If 1t was ascer-
tained that he WAS to blame for the disaster.
The court having decided what It's powers were.
Captain Eyre was sworn and gave his evidence.
TIE COLLISION.
Other witnesses followed giving substantially
accounts agreeing with the telegraphed state
mcnts on both sides OF the question. Among the
witnesses may be mentionediRobert B. Clements,
OF the Royal navy, who boarded the Bombay
shortly afterher arrival, as officer OF the guard,
and who swears positively that Captain Eyre
said TO him, ~ have cut the quarter OH Yankee
lrigate; served her right; she crossed my bows
with starboard helm." The CHIEF evidence,
that given by the commander or the Bombay and
by Master Isaac s. Yates, in charge OF the deck
OF the Oneida which, having but recently been
published in substance, need not be reproduced
in detail The following is the
DECISION or THE COURT.
The president pronounced the following decis.
ion OF the court:
Tie questions before this court are:
l. Was the injury sustained ny the Peninsular
and Oriental Steamship Navigation conpany's
shin Bombay brought about by the fault or tile
commander, 3fr Eyre?
.. After the collision had taken place between
the steamship Bombay aud the Uni,e,i States cor
rette Oneida, what was the conduct Of tile master
of the former vesSel9
Tile two statements OF Captain Eyre and Lieu:
tenant Yates are utterly irreconcilabla; and
though the collision Is accounted FOR ny each OF
them, 1t certainly could never have occurred II
both are correct. IL IS. therefore. necessary TO
look further, anal see how far each is substantial
ed. The statement OF Mr.. Eyre is borne ont in all
its material points by the evidence of the pilot
and chief officer who were on the bridge with
him. and also by that of all the officers Of the
bombay who are able to testify TO The civcum-
stances.
With regard to Mr. Ya:cs' statement. however.
the s;arbo1rh lookout man OF the Oneida afllrms
that about fifteen minutes previous TO the COLI
sion h, reported TO Mr.. Yates that lie saw mast
head light right ahead. and that as soon as lie
could make ont one Of her side lights he reported
her green light between half point anil point
on the 0neda'S Starboard bow. About minute
or minute and Il half after that he reported The
steamer t3Oinbay) about four or five points on
her starbOar1 bow and coming right for the
Onea's green light; but At no time lid he see
the Dombay's red light before the collision tonE
place. The hellnsman asserts that he heard the
Bombay reported three different times by the
lockout to the oiliccr Of the watch--flrst, half
point on tue starboard b0w; secondly, point
aud q half on his starboard bow, and thirdly, as
"a ,uht fOrt DupiIll.
order .sturboard'' then STEADY" and then 10
"lct the ship come on her course again, y
after the second report had been made, and
that after tue third report had been made Mr..
| Yates again told him to starboard-aflcr doing
which lie saw the Bombay's masthead light
| about five points on the starboard sidc oil the
forcsail; that he kept his helm hard starhoard
until he heard an order given to port and that as
| he was III the act OF Obeying tile order the two
ships came into collision. IL will thus he seen
that the statements OF Mr.. Yates, the lookout
man, and the helInSman are more or less con :
| dieting: but 1t may he gathered from them that,
when the Bombay;s three lights should have been
seen by the lookout man as well as Ivy Mr.. Yates,
she was about three points on Tie Oneiua 5 star
| board bow, about mile distant and porting her
| helm. Mr. Yates states that at this moment lie
| gave the order "StarlOard,o aHd thea "hard
starboard." If these orders had been promptly
obcye |, the court Is Of opinion that The ships
| coull not have come into collision. Eut the state.
| ment OF Albert Hugaart, the hclmslnan shows
that the Oneidas heal was about southeast when
she sirucE-by which it woud appear that She
had only come up about three points In three
minutes, so that Mr.. Yates orders could not have
been promptly obeyed
llccc II Is impossible to account for the colli-
sion by the statements OF the survivors OF the
0uclrla, If these are unrcserved!y accepted.
We are or opinion that whoa Mr.. Mu!daur said
to Mr.. Yates that lie could hot 20 any further 10
the port or eastern shore, and ordered him to re-
su,nc his course for fear OF running Oh the SARA
tuga spit he Slou!I-Snowing that IL waS his duty
to get out Of tile way Of m approaching vessel
| Oh Ills starboard sle-at once have brought the
| bombay VII his port bow, ana so opened out his
red light instead OF simply resnminS his course
That IT, when collision was seen to be nmi-
nent. the same promptness had been shown by
the 0aeiia in porting her helm As shown by the
Bomb ~ IN n9ltnG her helm hard starboard, IL
might p,ssiiuly have been erres!ed; while had IL
occurred, i.i effects would certainly nave peru
far less serious.
1t is shown 10y tue evidence OF the oaeida's Of.
fcrrs that at no timo was the OnetIaS speed
slackened after the bombay came IN sight, and
that although the Bombay was considered to bc
perslslently breaking rule OF the road by port
ing, the On.irla's helm was nevertheless Kept q
starboard: and thus the Judgment required 10 DC
| exercised In order to counteract tile presumed
mismana2emcnt OF an approaching steamer was
not shown. These observations are not made as
| n judgment on the management OF the Oneida,
which i, beyond the province Of the court to con-
slider, but simply In order 10 institute such COM
purison rs is necessary 10 show the grounds upon
which the court arrives at Its conclusion
If the statements OF Mr.. Eyre. his pilot and OIL
GERS are 10 be believed, we judge that he WAS
right In Keeping on the starboard Slc OF the
channel, and that lie acted perfectly Alright In
porting his helm rs spon rs he saw the Onel1a's
light Oh the port bow. We judge thal he should
hayo s'ackened speed rs soon rs he saw the
I Oaea = lights; that lie acted rightly in stopping
| his engines; that lie had uo time after stopping
to reverse them, and that he exercised sound
| Judgment in starboarding his helm when he saw
that a collision was Imminent, ana th;t the
tnpInn nnNat
Upon comparison uf the foregoing statements
we lind That the damage which has bcen sustain
cd by the bombay Is IN no way attributable to
the default Of her commander Mr.. Eyre.
! As rnrarls the second question Which the