New-York tribune., 1921-03-12
Fate of Hewitt and Carroll
C.. Deering Linked; Steel
Steamer Sinks, Wood
Ell Ship Goes Ashore
Scl,ooner's Boats Missing
Collision Theory Is Held to
Explain Disappearance;
No Wrcckagc Is Reported

al two ships, is puzzling American
sbipping and marine insurance men.
Without any direct evidence to go on,
there is reason to believe that the fate
of both vessels ana both crews is the
result OF one act.
The steel steamship Hewitt, owned
ty the Union Sulphur Company, of New
York. and the five-masted wooden
schooner. Carroll A. Deerine owned
by the G. G. Deering Company. of
Bath, Me, are the principal figures in
a marine tragedy not detail of which
is known, although weeks have elapsed
since tho occurrence.
The Hewitt was built in 1914 at Che
Fore River plant of the Bethlehem
steel Corporation for John S. Emery
& Co., under the name of the Pacific,
together with another vessel, the At
lantic, for use in the intercoastal trade.
The Atlantic was torpedoed by q Ger
man submarine during the war.
Hewitt High-Grade Ship
In December, 1915, the Pacific was
bought by the Union Sulphur Company
and renamed the Hewitt. She was
taken over by the government in
August, 1917. to carry supplies for the
army transport service, but was re-
turned to her owners in February,
1919, since which time she had been
steadily in their service.
The Hewitt which was built to the
highest class of Lloyds Register, was
vessel of $500 tons gross. her length
between perpendiculzrs was 337. Meet
and her breadth SAB feet. She had
wireless apparatus and submarine
signal. She was equipped with recipro-
eating engines.
The Hewitt was used in the sulphur
carrying trade between Sabine, Tex,
and Portland. Me. Early in January
while at Portland, she underwent her
annual examination by the United
States Steamboat Inspection Service
and was reported in perfect condition.
On January ~ last the Hewitt left
i, safpEe for Portland with cargo OF
5000 tons Of sulphur. under comm sas-s
Of Captain Hans J. Hanson. pho had
been in the service Of .ne Union Sui
phur Company for 1nout eight years.
Her crew rSAbastd forty-two men.
"lreicSS reports ReceIyed
Nirefhss reports from the vessel
were received at the Now York offices
of the company daily, giving the ships
position and the state of the weather
None OF these indicated that anything
whatever was amiss with the vessel
message, dated p. M. January %
stated that the Hewitt was then about
22o miles off Jupiter Light. off the
Florida Coast, and that the weather
was moderate. That was the last woro
rom the vessel.
When no messages were received
during the next few days the owners
surmised that the wireless had got
out OF comm lssion, g not unusual oc-
currence When she failed to arrive al
Boston ou January 25 as expected at
.emptS wef- made to get in touch with
her by wireless. These failing, the
navy was asked to aid in the searcl
and on February ] the Hewitt wa,
.sroadcasted' for, messages being sen
from every naval sta lion, inc iuding the
great plant at Arlington. There wa.
no result, however.
Two Ships In Same Area
At the time of the Hewitt's disap
oearance the Carroll c. Deering was
coming UP the Atlantic Coast from n,
River Plate in ballast and carving ;
VI SiAtSSli one H3u no WlreIeSS
Previous reports on the location O.
the schooner indicate that she mus
nave been about in the same position
as the Hewitt when the latter wa
iast heard from. About five days afte.
me last message from the Hewitt th'
arroll q. Deering was reported as
derelict. On February she cam
ashore near Beaufort, N. c.
"nen the coast guard got to her sh
vas lying on her side, sunken abou
eighteen inches into the sand and vel
wandlng. No one was aboard and tn
lfeboats were gone. Food, which ha,
oeen placed in the galley oven to COO
was still there.
Whether the two vessels had bee
N collision cannot be determined. fo
,ne Carroll G. Deering broke up ralid
" and there was no opportunity to L
spect The side on which she l.y.
Collision Theory Held
mat there was colisio, howeve
IS the belief Of shipping men. If tn
schooner had been struck, they say, he
wooden construction and the fact tha
she was in ballast would have serve
70 keep her adoat longer than the steel
oulit Hewitt, with her 5000 tons O
cargo which may have sunk befor
her crew could lie We her.
The disappearance Of the crew O
me schooner after taking to the bot.
however, is the most mysteriou
feature of the case. There was no 70,
no gale. and no storm at the perio
a. which the accident is supposed t
nave taken place. The locality is
widely navjgated one, but no signs c
wreckage have been reported h. an
OF tne many vessels passing that wa
IN the weeks that have elapsed.
That the crew OF the schooner ma
nave stood by in their lifeboats to al
me men on the Hewitt and may y
Seen drawn down in the suction cause
py the sinking of the steamer is OF
81 the theories advanced, but the lac
ol oars, life preservers or other floa
.hg wreckage is instanced as an arg,
meat against this theory The ou
sanding fact is the disappearance
4nalty-elght men and the vanishing
me Hewitt, mystery that is deept
nan the disappearance of tha collie
syciops, because it involves every sol
ABOARD two ships