34
THE NEW ZEALAND GAZETTE.
side of the ship, and being so he intended hoisting up
the boat with everything in her," viz., thirteen men,
luggage, and probably some water; secondly, "that
the ship had no lee side, therefore one side was as
safe as the other." With regard to the first I am
very well certain that the crew left on board, viz.,
thirteen hands (including three stewards and two
cooks and five engine-room hands), could not have
hoisted the boat up, that is supposing the davits and
tackle were sufficiently strong, which I consider by no
means likely. With regard to the second, the
wind being East, or blowing direct on the shore,
and the tide ebbing or making southward (and I think
according to Clarkson's evidence I may fairly add a
southerly set, but apart from this), a vessel riding to
easterly wind and a southerly tide, must have her
port side a lee side. Of course it will depend upon
the relative strength of each as to how much it will
become so. I may also remark that the port side
would in this instance be the in-shore side.
The Harbour Master states that after the accident
he took the life-boat on the port side of the ship, as
he considered that side then the lee side. This
officer, on being cross-examined by Captain Malcolm,
also stated that at the time he was alongside, the
wind had changed four or five points to the southward,
the sea had gone down, and that the port side was
then a lee side. Now, as the wind veering from
East towards the South would bring ship's head in
that direction, and necessarily would bring round
the port side more to the eastward or more towards
the point the wind had been blowing from, therefore
it is clear the port side was then less a lee side than
it was at the time of the accident; and considering
the short time which elapsed between the accident
until the Harbour Master went alongside, and the fact
of the tide not having changed, I do not see that there
could have been much change in the state of the sea.
With regard to the second mate's answer when he
was told by Captain Malcolm to steer the boat for
the port side of the ship, viz., "That the boat would
not answer her helm," I think that might be true,
although not corroborated, as I find from evidence
the bow oar was pulled on the port side; but
the steering could easily have been remedied by
easing the bow oar, a thing often done. It is per-
fectly absurd to suppose that the boat could not as
easily have been taken to the port side as well as the
starboard side, or lee side as well as the weather side.
With reference to the mode adopted by those on
board of saving lives, I think great allowance should
be made: no doubt everybody did his utmost, and
whatever error might have been committed was under
great excitement. I think, however, I ought to
point out-first, that the Mate, in trying with only
two hands to lower a boat in such weather, instead of
endeavouring to save lives with ropes, buoys, planks,
&c., made a mistake. If the boat had been success-
fully lowered, with only the crew he had, unless well
have met the same fate as the other. Secondly, the
life-buoys being made of thin, light material, and
intended only to keep up persons in the water,
should not have been used to haul persons up with.
And, thirdly, when those in the water had only hold
of a rope, it was a mistake to try and haul them up
by it; a bowline should have been taken round the
rope held and slipped down, when the person immersed
could easily have placed it under his shoulders. Unless
the man be much exhausted there is no difficulty in
doing this; but should he be exhausted, a man should
go down in a bowline and make him fast. This prac-
tice is well known to sailors.
I cannot finish this Memorandum without noticing
a paragraph which has appeared in the papers, -a
paragraph which, if allowed to go uncontradicted,
would tend to mislead the public, and is unfair to
the memory of the late Mr. Balfour. The paragraph
states that Captain Malcolm made the following
remarks to the Board of Inquiry, which remarks I,
however, do not see in evidence: -"That Mr.
Balfour, as the head of the Marine Department,
could have ordered the shore life-boat to take them
off, and could have prevented the ship's boat taking
off passengers if he thought the sea too rough." And
further, "If he (Captain Malcolm) had disobeyed
any of Mr. Balfour's orders, it would be as much as
his certificate was worth." Now, in the first place,
Mr. Balfour had no control whatever over the shore
life-boat; secondly, he was not a sailor, and was
not supposed to know when the weather was too
rough for a boat; and, as the head of the Marine
Department, could not possibly have any control
over the duties of Captain Malcolm. He had, how-
ever, the power of cancelling certificates; but it has
never been done except on the recommendation of a
Board of Inquiry, and then always approved of by
the Honorable the Postmaster-General. Granting
that Captain Malcolm seriously meant what he said;
and further, taking into consideration what he stated,
and which appears in evidence, viz., "That he would
again, in a similar sea, take off the boat," without at
the same time giving any explanation as to how he
would do it; the question arises whether he should
be allowed to retain a certificate of competency,
which enables him to retain command of a ship, and
have the lives of crew and passengers under his care.
To summarize the whole, I consider that the
weather at the time of accident was not so bad as
not to justify either the use of the shore or ship's
boat, but the accident arose from the mismanage-
ment of the latter; that although every exertion was
made by those on board to save lives, some errors of
judgment were committed, but which no doubt were
done under great excitement.
Marine Department,
R. JOHNSON.
Wellington, 18th January, 1870.

Colonial Defence Office,
Wellington, 18th January, 1870.
HIS Excellency the Governor has been pleased to
accept the resignations of the commissions held
by the under-mentioned officers, viz. :--
Captain G. W. Jordan, Wellington Militia.
Captain E. H. Power, No. 1 Company, Hauraki
Rifle Volunteers.
Lieutenant A. E. T. Devore, 1st Westland Rifle
Volunteers.
Honorary Ensign E. J. Allen, Hutt Rifle Volun-
teer Cadets.
W. GISBORNE
(in absence of Mr. McLean).

Colonial Defence Office,
Wellington, 18th January, 1870.
HIS Excellency the Governor has been pleased
to make the under-mentioned promotions and
appointments, viz. :--
In the Wellington Militia.
Robert George Park to be Ensign. Date of com-
mission, 23rd November, 1869.
In the No. 1 Company, Hauraki Rifle Volunteers.
Lieutenant Adam McCarroll to be Captain. Date
of commission, 23rd October, 1869.
William James Casely to be Lieutenant. Date of
commission, 23rd October, 1869.
In the Waiuku Rifle Volunteers.
Patrick Hennessy to be Ensign. Date of commis-
sion, 13th November, 1869.
W. GISBORNE
(in absence of Mr. McLean).