Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1915-08-11
NEGLIGENCEOF EMPLOYESHELD
RESPONSIRLEFOR TWODEATHS
Verdict of Public Utilities Com
mission After investigating
Lahaina Drowning


That the drowning of the two deck
passengers OF the steamship Kilauea
at Lahaina landing on the night OF
May ! could have been avoided. and
that Il was the result Of negligence on
the part OF employees OF the Inter-Isl-
and Steam Navigation Company, was
the decision reached by the Public
Utilities Commission at its meeting
yesterday afternoon.
The meeting, which was lengthy was
by no means tiresome, for discussions
regarding the findings OF the commits
sion between Joseph f. Sheedy of the
lnter-Island Company, and Chairman
Charles r. Forbes and various mem
bers OF the commission waxed at times
exceedingly warm.
AS first handed down, the findings
included letter from Mr.. Sheedy and
a reply to the same by Chairman
Forbes, but on the advice OF Arthur
G. Smith, deputy attorney-general,
these letters were separated from the
findings and made part of the rec
o-ds
Mr.. Sheedy's letter was accordingly
read before the commission before
formal notice was given in regard to
the findings. The letter, which was
very long. explained the landing place
at Lahaiaa, the position and function
OF the federal buoy as an indication
20 captains OF anchorage ground. and
the common anchorages made by the
different boats OF the company.
In regard to the drowning at La
haina, Mr.. Sheedy's letter says in
part:
The records OF the company show
that this loss OF life at Lahaina was
the first loss at any place in the ISL
ands In 20 years. During this time we
have carried more than 1000, 900 pas
sengers, THIS loss representing .0002
Of one per cent of the passengers
carried"
Then follow statements in regard
to the efficiency OF InterIsIand boat.
men, the seaworthiness of the boats
themselves and their equipment, as
recognized by federal authorities.
Would Welcome information.
while the company" continues the
letter. would welcome any informa-
tion to throw light upon the accident
and in order to prevent repetition OF
this disaster. yet, In order that there
may be no misrepresentation as to the
Jurisdiction of the commission with
regard to the safety OF passengers. we
beg to call your attention to the fact
that the federal laws and regulations
with regard to shipping are exclusive
and that neither the Territory Of Ha-
wall nor any OF It's political subdiyi-
sions, boards or commissions, hes au-
thority Of jurisdiction TO add any bur-
dens whatsoever in this regard"
Il was this paragraph that seemed
70 bump up hardest against Chairman
forbes and the other members Of the
commission.
In reply to Mr.. Sheedy's letter Mr..
Forbes made answer, and at the con-
clusion Of his reply recommended sew
eral suggestions for the consideration
or the coinpany.
These suggestions stated that only
boat steerers familiar with the island
landings be used, that all boats be In
charge Of deck officer, that signals
be arranged between the Lahaina
wharf and q vessel outside. that
searchlights be kept upon the boats
making landings, that the crew of
every ship be instructed as to its duty
in case OF accident, that the INTEREST
and company furnish the Public Utili.
ties Commission with information con-
corning the previous experience of
boat steerers, that the full names of
all deck passengers be taken, and
that lifeboat with proper equipment
be kept by the company at Lahaina
for immediate use in case of accident.
When Mr.. Sheedy walked into the
meeting during the discussion which
arose following the reading of the two
letters, be met very much wroughtup
group Of commissioners.
Chairman Forbes tackled Mr.. Shee-
0y on the paragraph in his letter
which limited at the limitations OF the
utilities commission In regard to de-
cisions or suggestions rendered
Don't you think, asked Mr.. Forbes.
that this commission knows what its
business isl"
Mr.. Sheedy was not sure of it.
well, | can tell you that we do
rejoined the chairman with evident
heat.
Not Trying to interfere.
Mr.. Sheedy then made the distinc-
ton between the duties OF the CON-
mission in the matter of fares, accom-
modations and service to passengers,
and the duties OF the commission in
the matter Of making rules for nayi-
cation and the conduct of the crew.
Mr.. Forbes admitted that there was a
difference between the two, and said
that 1t was not the intent of the COM
mission to try to interfere in any way
with federal statutes.
Mr.. Sheedy took exception to the
that names of deck passen-
gers should be secured. He stated
that IL accommodations had to be pro-
vided for such passengers they would
no longer be deck travellers, and would
be required to pay second or third
class rates, which he said would be
higher. He said further that the fed
eral laws did not require such names
unless passengers had staterooms.
The question proved a fruitful sub
iecf for more hot discussion Chairman