Readers Questions Answered

Question No 1, Mr. William Harris of Mona Vale N.S.W. asked the following question, being a reader of blogs on the Waratah and articles connected with her,  I and other readers  are told there was an amount of disturbingly poor documentation and record keeping of the Waratah's final cargo manifest, is that true?

Answer Q 1, No not true, if there was poor record keeping and documentation how would the ship make a profit out of the freight to be carried? I can assure you that every ounce of cargo placed on board the Waratah was duly recorded by tally clerks for the agents, also the ships officers checked and recorded any cargo coming aboard in the cargo book, added to this were the mates receipts  along with the  bills of lading.  Lack of knowledge of the Waratah's cargo was certainly not the case there were many newspaper reports giving mention on some parts of her cargo but not all of it. To uncover the actual truth about the Waratah  I spent a great deal of my spare time when working in London visiting the many historical institutions that held shipping records and putting in  many hours studying every aspect of the Waratah.  On the 4th of February 2018 I posted an article in which I mentioned that the Waratah shipped approximately 1,500.75  tons of concentrates in Sydney on her maiden voyage this I found in the records along with her manifests. What is interesting, is that all the press reports and blogs etc,  not one has ever  mentioned this fact, all we ever read  about is the 1,000 tons shipped in Adelaide. To prove the accuracy of my statements lets take for example the 1,000 tons of lead concentrates as well as the 1,300 tons said to have been loaded at that period  as against samples of the actual Bill of Lading shown below.

Bill of lading No 1                                                      
Shipper   Max Gorlen,        

                     Mine weight                                                                    Ships weight
                 TONS        Cwt       Qtr                                                  TONS            Cwt       Qtr             
                   497             16          3                                                     483                _             _
                   502              9           1                                                     487
 Total=     1000              6                                                    Total   = 970  


                
483 tons, Rate 10/-shillings per ton    241-10/- (Two hundred and forty one Pounds and ten shillings)
487 tons, Rate 10/-shillings per ton    243-10/- (Two hundred and forty three Pounds and ten shillings.)

Total freight 485 pounds for carrying 970 tons of lead concentrates to London.  
Note the concentrates were shipped in two parcels as above, No 3 lower hold was subdivided by an athwartships bulkhead, one parcel was placed in the forward section of No 3 hold and the other parcel in the aft section of No 3 hold to a height of 8 feet high. This left a gap of 11 feet between the top of the concentrates and the next deck above which was  No 3 lower tween deck, the depth of No 3 hold was 19 feet. 

Bill of lading No 6,
Wallaroo &Moonta  M&S Co Ltd

Copper ingots 3,510  25 tons, Rate 17/shillings and 6pence per ton = 21-17-6 (twenty one pounds
seventeen shillings and six pence.

Bill of lading No 7,
Copper ingots 7,140  50tons, Rate 17/shillings and 6pence per ton =43-15 (forty three pounds and 15 shillings)

Total 65pounds 12shillings and 6pence for carrying 75 tons of copper ingots to London.

       Condition of number 3 lower hold when leaving Adelaide for Sydney on her second voyage.
  
The accuracy and description of each item loaded on board  the Waratah was quite astounding, I even came across small corrections on three  items of  frozen cargo by which each parcel and the calculated freight was one shilling understated (1/-)  this was then re adjusted to the correct freight rate. It was not the lack of information on the cargo that was a problem, it was the actual placement of the various weights in the hatches and holds.  

                                                                                          
                                          Copper ingots awaiting to be loaded on board a ship.




                                                       

Readers questions answered on the Waratah

Question No1, Why were the lifeboat davits rusted on such a new ship preventing them from being swung out to launch a boat unless a steam winch was used to move them?

Answer Q1, The lifeboat davits were never rusted, the type of davits supplied to the Waratah were known as rotating davits with the shafts that extended from the boat deck to the next deck below.

The blue arrow points to a circular bracket (oiled or greased)  attached to the boat deck, the red arrow points to the deck socket  (greased) and secured by heavy bolts through the deck. This diagram shows the davit inboard of the ships side, many ships such as the Waratah had their davits secured to the outside of the ship. The reason they could not be moved in the normal manner for launching was due to the fact that they became slightly bent at the round boat deck brackets caused by the heavy boat deck moving. When the Waratah rolled in a seaway the boat deck moved laterally to the bottom structure of the ship, this action is known as racking.

Racking is more usual in ships when sailing empty however excessive top weight such as the boat deck of the Waratah had a similar effect.

SS WARATAH AT STEAMERS WHARF ADELAIDE ON HER FINAL VOYAGE JULY 1909.
The top arrow is the boat deck bracket where the slight bending would have taken place, the lower arrow is the base socket.

Swinging a boat out with this type of davit has always been hard work requiring a lot of strength and brawn with a good ten or twelve men to push one end of the boat out at time causing the davit to rotate out over the ships side. There was plenty of proof that the boat deck moved when the ship rolled,  deck planking opened up and needed re-caulking, a bolt had snapped off and fell onto the promenade deck as well as gap opening up above the saloon doorway so wide that a man could put his fingers in it. Here we have an actual eye witness on the second voyage, Nicholas Sharp Able Seaman (AB) who gives a definitive account of trying to move a life boat.
Giving evidence Nicholas Sharp said," after arriving in Sydney, and when she was berthed at the wharf (Millers Wharf), I saw some of the crew trying to lift No 6 boat off the chocks. I was off duty at the time, on account of sickness. The removal of the boat was necessary for the purpose of bunkering. Between ten and fifteen men were hauling on the tackle falls of No 6 boat. They had difficulty in raising the boat off the chocks (wooden cradles that the boat sits in on the deck) because of a rope to big a gauge through the block. The chief officer was present shortly afterwards,  and the men tried to haul the davits round by hand but failed. then a tackle was rigged (block and tackle) and the men hauled on the tackle but could not shift the davits.

                                           Block and tackle the men used but could not move the davits.

By the direction of the chief officer who came on deck at the time, a four inch rope was passed around the end of the davit and attached to a steam winch; the steam was applied and the davits were pulled around in that way, the davits were rusted in (so they thought). The ship was lying over on the wharf at Sydney, it was a very big list. When the vessel arrived in Sydney I was under treatment by the ship's doctor, and I asked for a discharge on the ground of sickness. I did not want to go back on the ship, I was well enough to have gone back. I asked to leave the vessel because I thought she was unseaworthy. I was given my discharge and left the vessel on the 17th of June 1909". Here was an experienced seaman of many years experience who because of his fear of the ship made out he was a sick man in desperation to save himself.

                                        SWINGING OUT A LIFE BOAT DURING A DRILL IN 1897.

This obviously is only a drill as the lifeboat cover is still intact. and the ship is underway, probably it's the first time for this crew judging by the amount of officers supervising  the crew who appear to be Lascars. (From the Indian Sub Continent)

Question No 2, Was Captain Ilbery driving or pushing the Waratah on the second voyage home?

Answer Q 2, Yes without a doubt he was driving his ship hard to arrive in London at the earliest.
In the court of inquiry Mr.Laing for the Board of Trade mentions a letter in July 1909 from the Melbourne agent of the owners to Captain Ilbery in which they expressed a wish that the Waratah should make a good passage home. He did did not give instructions for the captain to push the vessel home. She arrived at Durban one day ahead, but that was because a considerable latitude was allowed, he was instructed to leave one day early. During the course of my research I came across the actual letter which virtually inferred that Captain Ilbery should make a fast passage. The letter was written by John Sanderson to Messrs Lund in London.
                                                                        LETTER,
"WARATAH", this steamer arrived on the morning of Monday, the  28th Ist., and to this effect we cabled you as per interpretation slip (list of cargo shipped from Melbourne). She leaves here tomorrow -i c., one day ahead of her programmed time. This has been arranged so as to avoid as much overtime as possible at Adelaide. She is getting a very good cargo here, and will have nearly 2,000 bales of wool. A quantity of this wool is for Dunkirk and for America and it is essential it should be delivered as quickly as possible.
We had in competition with us for this wool (which is out of a sale which was held last week, the Indragheiri ,which vessel went via the Suez Canal. We are very anxious that her arrival dates should not be to greatly ahead of those of the Waratah. We explained this to Captain Ilbery and he knows the necessity of reaching London at the earliest possible opportunity.

                 SS  INDRAGHERI COMPETITOR TO WARATAH FOR THE WOOL CARGO.

Added to the above letter by the agent, Mr. Hodder the Chief Engineer wrote a letter from Durban on July 25th 1909 to Mr. Shanks engineer superintendent for Lund's in London. He stated that on account of the ship being deep I could not fill No 8 tank with 250 tons of fresh water. I was instructed by Captain Ilbery to drive home (full steam on all boilers) and take sufficient for same, it being a winter passage, I took sufficient coal to run no risks. There is an obvious miss report by a newspaper for we know that No 8 tank is a saltwater ballast tank holding 222 tons. What Mr. Hodder meant, was that he wanted to fill No 8 tank with salt water but was unable to do so because the Waratah was either sitting on the bottom at her berth at C shed or very close to it. The reason he couldn't fill the tank was that the pipe from the sea chest (water inlet on the bottom of the hull) to the valve that lets in the water when opened up was completely blocked. Why did he need to fill that particular tank? the answer lies in the fact that there was a note written on the stability graph. The note states "if any condition is to be considered that the vessel has insufficient stability, the filling of No 8 tank increases the GM by about 4" inches. We know that the ship had a list and we are told that the coal needed to be trimmed to make the ship level and Captain Ilbery held up the sailing until the ship was upright. I do not believe the Waratah was as stable as the court implied when she sailed from Durban. 240 tons of cargo was unloaded at Durban, but I have a statement to say a great deal more was off loaded and no cargo taken in. Room had to be made due the fact that she was going to load bagged maize at Capetown for London which was going to be stowed in No 1 hold, no mention of this was made at the Inquiry. 

   

Readers questions on ss Waratah Answered

 Due to the volume of queries I receive by email on a weekly basis, It is becoming more time consuming to answer each individual question, because of this I have had to cut back my time spent at the computer. As the questions arrive I now collate them by importance into a list to be  answered and posted  all at once. Due to the backlog no further questions on Waratah  will be received by me or answered until the present queue has been cleared and notification posted that I will be receiving further queries . I will only answer questions  from readers who only provide their GENUINE email address and phone number including their country code, this is to eliminate time wasters and nuisances that tend to plaque the internet.
The first series of questions seem to be obviously asked by Waratah readers who have given thought to the actual mystery,  I am sure other devotees of the ss Waratah will find them most interesting and I trust my answers will satiate fully for the first time their thirst for some true answers.
   
                                               DOUBLE BOTTOM OF THE WARATAH. 
Question No1, Did the double bottom tanks of the Waratah run the whole length of the ship, and what were the capacities?

Answer Q1, YES,  however only sections of the tanks were actually filled with water, for example bottom tanks running from aft for a  length of 95 feet, under the engine room and boiler room 78 feet, then forward of that 118 feet. at total of 291 feet. A total of 1,238 tons being both fresh water and salt. Note this does not include the fore peak and after peak ballast tanks, total 100 tons salt water which were not double bottom tanks.

Double bottom tank section.

Modern construction of a ship showing double bottom section which would be used for oil supply for ships engine/engines, and shows side tanks or saddle tanks used for ballast water.

Comparison of the ss Geelongs'  double bottom, the  so called sister ship to the Waratah is given as, 

 from aft 91 feet, under engine room and boiler room 65 feet, from there to forward 184 feet, 1,081tons of water fresh and salt. 

 Some  writers class the Geelong  as the sister ship to the Waratah , I have never gone along with this, if any ship at all was to be the sister ship to the Geelong it was the ss Commonwealth, the Waratah was a three deck vessel not a two decker. 

               SS Commonwealth emptying out her ballast tanks to get ready ready for a new cargo.

        Commonwealth kicking up her heels with a bone in her Mouth, (Bow) flying along half empty.

Commonwealth double bottom from aft 82feet, under engine room and boiler room 74feet, forward 41 feet. depth of hold 30.7 feet deep.

Question No 2,  How much wool was on board the Waratah ?

Answer Q2, There were two manifests for the wool cargo shipped in bales, at Sydney 44 bales were

loaded and in Melbourne 2,245 bales were shipped giving a total of 2,289 bales weighing 350 tons.

Each bale weighed an average of 342.5 lbs which tell us that the wool was scoured. A bale of Australian wool not scoured is unclean or greasy wool and weighs usually about 384 lbs. The two types should never be stowed together to prevent the greasy wool contaminating the clean scoured wool. There is always a risk of fire with wool when carried, careful ventilation must be carried out during the voyage for this type of cargo. Wet or damp bails should be immediately rejected by the officers of the ship in order to avoid claims against the ship and to avoid the heating up of the bales resulting in spontaneous combustion.

Question No 3, In letters to the owners Captain Ilbery mentioned a cow on board, was this cargo?

Answer Q3,  No the cow was not cargo it was specifically carried for the purpose of supplying fresh milk for the saloon passengers and infants which was the custom of the period. This dates back to the time when the Cunard paddle steamer Britannia left Liverpool on July 4th 1840 for her 14 day transatlantic crossing to America. On this voyage she carried two cows for milk and a battery of hens supplying eggs for the saloon passengers.

                                             SS BRITANNIA  LEAVING LIVERPOOL 1840.

Some shipping companies in order to induce passengers would often advertise the facts that their ships carried a Surgeon, a stewardesss and cows.
With the Waratah the cow was carried up on the boat deck in a sheltered pen not much bigger than herself. On most ships cows were carried for a period of up to six months or more depending on the time when her milk became of poor quality and quantity. They were then usually killed by the ships butcher and the meat was eventually consumed by the crew. Captain Ilbery was no doubt keeping the owners updated as to the cows health and daily milk production for future reference. He was no stranger to carrying cattle and was well versed in the welfare of cattle when he was engaged in the coastal trade for some months at a time in Australia. W. Lund had contracts to ship cattle from Northern Queensland to Brisbane and the first ship fitted out for that trade was the ss Yoeman commanded by Captain Ilbery. As a matter of interest it was during one of these periods of coastal trading that Captain Ilbery had two members of his crew sent to prison for three months for refusing to work the ship. The reason for their refusal was that the Australian seamen working the coast were paid higher wages than the British seamen and they demanded the same rates of pay while working on the Australian coast.

A FINE MILKING SPECIEMEN

Question 4, On the first voyage Captain Ilbery stopped the coaling of the Waratah in Sydney for fear of her capsizing when she took on a dangerous list, is this true?

Answer Q,4 Yes, this happened on two occasions and there were many witnesses to verify that it actually occurred even though there was very little attention paid to it by the Board of Trade inquiry for obvious reasons, they were the Government body that certified ships to be safe and also responsible for the safety of the general public being transported in British sea going vessels. Captain Ilbery had to stop coaling the ship because of her heeling over to a dangerous point likely to cause a capsize. On the second stoppage of coaling the ship, matters escalated when the coal lumpers refused to go aboard to finish coaling unless they were given double their pay because they considered the ship unsafe. In order to rectify the stability of the Waratah all ballast and fresh water tanks including fore and aft peak tanks were filled giving a total of 1,338 tons bottom weight, on top of this lead concentrates were loaded into the bottom holds. The ships record of loading showed that 1,501 tons 15cwt (15hundredweights = 1,680lbs) and 3qtrs (3quarters = 84lbs) were shipped into number 3 lower hold and number 4 lower hold. Cargo weights had to be manipulated then placed in the holds accordingly, while one hatch was being unloaded another was being loaded at the same time. What became apparent to Captain Ilbery and his officers on this first voyage was that after discharging cargo at Adelaide and Melbourne some form of extra weight was required before unloading the remaining cargo in Sydney to keep the ship stable. This is why on the second voyage 970 tons of lead concentrates were taken in at Adelaide and placed in the bottom of number 3 lower hold which had held coal for the voyage out from London and was burned up prior to arriving at Adelaide so as to make space in that hold which then swept clean by the crew and made ready for the lead concentrates. It must have been a nightmare in Sydney for Captain Ilbery with no loading plan from the builders along with no stability information which was not on board when he left London. To make matters worse on the 8th of January the day before he was due to sail Captain Ilbery had to notify the authorities that two crew members had deserted the ship which resulted in fines against the Captain of 100 pounds for each deserter. According to what other crew members said, the men told them they didn't trust the ship and had been further influenced by the actions of the coal lumpers. On the same day the 8th the ss Wilcannia of the Blue Anchor Line arrived in Sydney commanded by Captain Hanson and was due to sail again on the 11th of January. No doubt Captain Ilbery would have relished dinner with Captain Hanson and no doubt discussed the trials and tribulations of his new command. It is interesting to note that the Waratah spent 16 days in Sydney on her first voyage there and only 9 days on the second voyage, probably due to the fact that much time was saved by loading the concentrates in Adelaide before arriving at Sydney.

                                                                 LEAD CONCENTRATES