Please wait. Contacting image service... loading
Hide article pages Show article pages
  1. Page 2
    Page 2 thumbnail
  2. Page 3
    Page 3 thumbnail

Article text

On this Page 2
Quarter Sessions.
[Before His Honor A. MacFarland, Esq., and a Bench
of Magistrates.]
Wednesday, January 4, 1860.
Frederick Davis, master mariner, charged
with misdemeanor, for that being master of
the brig Robertina, on the 2nd November
last, he did by neglect of duty omit to perform
certain acts, such omission tending to the im-
mediate loss of the said vessel. The indict-
ment contained four counts.
The prosecution was conducted by the
Acting Advocate General and Mr. Leake.
Mr. Howell conducted the defence.
This was a case depending entirely upon
conflicting nautical opinions. The first
witness examined was.
T. Brown, Esq., J. P. Collector of Cus-
toms, who deposed to having taken on oath
the statements of the defendant, some of his
crew, and a passenger, as to the occurrence
from the time of the vessels' sailing until her
wreck on the Murray Reef in the evening of
the same day. The defendant willingly gave
every information in his power; on the last
examination, on the 14th November, the
Harbour Master was present to put questions
and consult with him, and he was to a certain
degree guided by his opinion, in the report
which he drew up and transmitted to the Go-
vernment for further instructions. On that
day the defendant informed him he intended
leaving immediately for K. G. Sound to take
the steamer to Melbourne, but I did not tell
him that any further steps would be taken, as
I did not know there would be.
Joseph Mallinson, late chief officer of the
Robertina, deposed to the brig's being piloted
out by the Harbour Master, the course being
about W. until 3 p.m., when the ship was
tacked steering close to the wind for the land
about S. E. ; took cross bearings at 6 p.m.,
Garden Island in sight and also the loom of
the main land. There was a general chart of
the coast on board. The top-gallant sails
were taken in between 6 and 6½ p.m.; did not
see the lead hove. Orders were given to keep
a good look out ahead. The ship struck
about 7.40 p.m ; the sea was smooth, weather
fine over head, hazy upon the land, no
breakers visible, first saw breakers, after
leaving the wreck in the boat. After striking
the lead was hove shewing 11 feet water.
About 10 minutes before striking heard the
captain give the order, " all hands ready to
bout ship;" the watch off duty were then be-
low. What he would have done as master of
the ship would depend entirely on the chart.
In cross examination,— The object of taking
cross bearings is to ascertain the ship's posi-
tion, which is marked on the chart, and if
that chart gave deep water in such position
I should not heave the lead ; the whole ques-
tion of heaving the lead depends upon what
the chart shews.
The object of tacking in shore at 3 p.m.
was to be able to take advantage of eveni
ing land breeze to run along the coast. Capt.
Davis was very cautious and attentive and
did not leave the deck except to look at the
chart; did not consider he omitted performing
any proper act.
In re-examination and in answer to the
Court the witness stated that if he had been
master of the ship he should have considered
himself justified in doing as the defendant
did. Could not say whether the rock upon
which the ship struck is marked upon the
chart.
William Davis, a passenger, deposed that

at 6 p.m. went up the fore rigging and saw,
the Coventry Reef about 3 miles off on the
lee beam, also Penguin Island, and the main
land. Never heard or saw the lead hove.
About four or five minutes elapsed between
the giving the order to go about and the ship's
striking. Considers the captain ought to
have hove the lead and kept it constantly
going; could not say whether the omission
tended to the wreck of the ship, but it might
have helped to have prevented it.

Cross-examined by Mr. Howell. -Has been
at sea 16 years. Knows the reef well, be
lieves it ia laid down in some charla and not
¡n others, it has several names.

By the Court -Did not tell Captain Davis
I had seen the Coventry Beef but I did tell

the second mate.

James Harding, master manner. Is Harbor
Master at Fremantle. Knows the locality of the
wreck. I believe I gave the defendant an account
of the coast but I cannot swear I did so ; it is my
general custom to do so. If I had been master
of the Robertina I should have tacked short
of the Reef or gone cautiously in by the lead.
The reef upon which the vessel struck is the
Murray Reef and known well to myself. I do
not think the defendant was justified in sailing the

vessl towards the land after sunset without using

Oross examined- I should have tacked short of
the reef because I knew of it. I do not think
there is any chart in general use with the reef
marked on it. I have charts of the boat in my
office the reef is not laid down in them ; it is not
my duty to it. The chart produced is that pre-
pared by Government and sold by it, the reef is
not marked in it, but the outline of the ooast oppo-
site the reef intimates that the coast should be
approached with caution ; the chart shows 9
fathoms water close to tbe situation of the reef.

Re examined-As a stranger with this chart
before me I should have tacked short of the
Coventry Reef, while the wreok took place six

miles within it.

J. S. Roe, Esq., R.N.. Surveyor General, de-
posed that the chart produced was the latest pub-
lished by the Admiralty, but had not the Murray
Reef marked in it. Had a chart in his office with
it marked, and had sent information of it to the
Admiralty. As a stranger would not have gone
inside the Coventry Reef without sounding.

This closed the evidence on the part of the
prosecution.

Mr Howell observed that the Advocate General
had not called a witness whose name was on the
back of the indictment and demanded that he
should be placed in the Box for cross examination,
the Court allowed the request and Captain Hybert
of the Lord Raglan being examined by Mr Howell
his evidence was quite opposite to that of Captain
Harding and Mr Roe.

Mr Howell then addressed the Jury at some
length, pointing out the conflicting testimony of
the witness for the Crown, and dwelt upon the
fact of the Reef not being marked in the charts
sold by the Government, and contended that one
omission of duty was on the part of the Crown in
not marking down on the chart a reef which was

well known to them.

The witnesses for the defence, were the Captains
of the Lord Raglan, West Australian, Crystal
Mace, and Glenburn, who all exempted the def-
fendant from any blame or neglect of duty, from
the facts and circumstances detailed in evidence.
The Judge summed up, the jury after a few
minutes returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Perth Police Court.

IBeforo T. N. Yule, Esq., J.P., Police Magistrate.)

Out AÏXBE HOUES.-James Callaghan and W.
Mclnnu, were charged with having been out after
hours. Callaghan was dismissed ; Mclnues was

lined 5B.

DUBHKABD.-J. Smith, was charged by Police
Constable Gee, with having been drunk and iu>
capable of taki.ig care of himself and team. He

va« fined 5s.

OBSOKNB LANGUAGE.-22. Hanley, free, was
charged hy Warder J?lindell, with having made
lue of obscene language to him, aud also to one of
the prison constables, wheu directed by them to
lea»e a Jetty, where a party of convicts were at
work. Hunley did uot deny having made use of
bad language, but he denied that it was so gross as
ftpreseuted by the complainant, and further, thai
he did uot inuke use of it to either the warder or
the constable, liia Woiship informed Hanley
that if hewas disposed to believe that he had nut
oede use of the language to the warder, still as he
aid uot deny having made use of bad language, and
.I iho Warder heard the expressions he had made
»*e of, he waa . by the new Act puuishuble. He

*M fiued in the sum of 10s.

BREACH OF THE PUBLICAN'S ACT.-Thomas
McHard, keeper of the " Devonshire Arms," was
charged by Police Constable Kenney with having
ra bouse opeu aller horns on the night of Wed
nesday, the 21st ult., and also for harbouring sol-
of the Royal Engineers on the same night.

J he evidence of Police Constable Kenuey was to
.heeffect, that ha was ou duty ou the night in
Question in Barrack ¡Street ; on reaching McHard's
w saw one soldier come out of the bnok parlour j
"".re were lights in the house then ; he knocked
«tho dour aud immediately the lights were put
ati a few minutes alter this he saw two more
»Mien come out of McHard's ; they were both
'» worse for liquor j he heard Mrs McHard's
Toice lUBide, but he could not Bay who opened tho

T. McHard in defence, informed the Benoh that
'aconaequenw of illnesa he went to bed early that

"ghi, ana did not kuow anything about whut took

Jhe Bench informed Mr McHard, that they had
«ermined on depriving him of his license, but on
Moutideration, tiley had come to tne oouclusiou

lessen the punishment, aud would fine him iu

"e sam of £10.

$