Morely Johnson's evidence, Captain Ilbery' Illness

Note: 

In the last post I showed a letter written by Mr. Morely Johnson which appeared to have been a copy of his either handwritten or typed original letter perhaps on the letterhead of his company. No trace of his original letter could be found in the records. The date on the letter In my last post is the 22nd of April the same date as his Affidavit herewith shown. The original letter would have been sent to the Board of  Trade immediately as its contents would have caused some alarm to them, I found no trace of this letter in the Archives in London. Reading through Mr. Morley's statement here,  there seems to be a common thread in some of the wording that appears in other affidavits taken, which indicates that the interviewer in this and other cases have made suggestions of what might look good in favour of the ship. 

Please excuse the quality of the original documents I have tried to make them as legible as possible  by enhancing  them for the reader.

                         

       

When the Waratah arrived back in England after the first voyage she was laid up for eight weeks undergoing dry docking and having repairs carried out. It was at this time that Captain Ilbery also went ashore and was said to be in ill health and may not return to the sea again. It was at this stage that Lund's had briefed Captain Pidgeon a long time employee to command the Waratah for the second voyage. Whether Captain Ilbery insisted on taking the second voyage or not is not known Nothing was mentioned about Captain Ilbery's  sickness or what he had been diagnosed with within in the court. In the medical records only one word was shown, he was described as to be suffering from Hyperpyrexia.  Definition; Hyper means abnormally increased, Pyrexia refers to fever. A fever is when the body's temperature rises above the normal 96.6 Fahrenheit. Hyperpyrexia occurs when the body's temperature rises above 106.7  Fahrenheit. This complaint is usually associated with viral infections. Hyperpyrexia is a sympton of a of a larger problem, finding the underlying cause is important and often challenging as it would have been in the early 1900's because medical science was not as advanced as it is today. One could speculate that the culprit may have been Malaria picked up on his travels. the The Ships Captain's medical guide provided to ships in that period gives instructions for dealing with fever that was somewhat crude by today's standards.

         

With the fever Captain Ilbery had, with lack of proper care at sea over a long period  he would have sustained headaches, mild confusion and if it got to bad prolonged periods of extreme confusion. Perhaps this is what the officers were concerned about with him being in charge and perhaps making dreadful mistakes. No doubt Captain Ilbery would have been well attended to by the ships doctors on each of his ships and was probably advised to seek further treatment after the first voyage.

                  A much younger looking Captain Ilbery in earlier years enjoying a cigarette.  

Crew wanted Captain lIbery relieved

 A careful study of documentation revealed that among the crew of the Waratah  including officers there was great dissatisfaction with the ship and her behaviour at sea, many felt that she was top heavy and feared she would not stand up to really heavy weather  and were frightened the ship would turn turtle. Some voiced their opinions against the ship openly in depositions and others chose to speak in favour of the ship for fear of being black banned for future employment. One crew member hoping to impress the Court by taking a chance on fact that the all his Peers connected to the inquiry were Masons and might look in a favourable manner on him when he opened his evidence by saying"he was a Mason". No doubt this would have brought some wry smiles to the faces of the legal teams. After the first voyage some officers felt the same way but could not give up their positions on arrival back in London due to the fact that there was a slump in the shipping industry.The merchant navy had now turned into an overcrowded profession with so many officers on the beach, there chances of getting another berth was practically at zero.To further highlight the situation ashore,an article appeared in Lloyd's Weekly Index dated March the 18th 1909 titled "UNEMPLOYED OFFICERS" and stated the following.

According to Mr.Moore, Secretary of the Imperial Merchant Guild, large numbers of Captains and Officers are out of employment and are experiencing the greatest difficulty in securing positions even in the lowest grades. Many have been unoccupied from twelve months to two years. The Secretary received a letter from an officer who holds a masters certificate, is aged 31 years of age and acted as chief officer on a large steamer. This officer states, that, having been out of employment, he is now looking for a berth as an A.B. but is unable to get one. He informs the Secretary of the Guild that he would be glad to know of any coasting Captain who would be willing to sign him on as an able seaman. 

A wealthy furniture store owner in Sydney Mr. Morley Johnson who travelled on the Waratah on the maiden voyage as a saloon  passenger with his wife, wrote a letter to the Crown Solicitor after reading about an appeal by the Board of Trade in Australian papers requesting information  from former passengers about the behaviour of the Waratah from London to Australia. Mr Johnson who was a close friend of Mr. George Hodder the chief engineer of the Waratah not only gave sworn evidence but wrote a letter in confidence to the Crown Solicitor throwing some light on the state of affairs aboard the Waratah which troubled him deeply due to his friendship that he had formed with the officers. His letter of course never saw the light of day in court only his written deposition.

   

        Copy of the original list of saloon passengers on the maiden voyage of the Waratah.

                Mr. Morley Johnson's letter written in confidence to the Crown Solicitor.

                  To be continued: in the next post, Captain Ilbery's medical condition.

  

  

                                      

Leaking portholes drenched the trimmers in the coal bunkers.

In my last post I dealt with the excellent narrative of William Henry Pearson Baker in which he described the working of the coal down below and the difficulties incurred as a trimmer of coal. Another trimmer by the name of William Craig Marshall gave his account of the unpleasantness of trimming coal in the bunkers. In many newspaper reports his name appeared with his comments but always in every case portholes were not mentioned. In the Annex to the main report of the Waratah inquiry only three lines of his account were published. The statement (herewith) of Mr. Marshall appears to be an honest account given by him.

COPY

WILLIAM CRAIG MARSHALL, on his oath saith;

I am a trimmer on the ss Ulimaroa trading between Sydney and the Bluff, New Zealand via, Hobart.
My home is 114 Victoria Avenue, Albert Park (near Melbourne)

I was formally a trimmer on the ss Waratah. I first joined the Waratah at Port Melbourne Railway Pier on January 9th  1909. I sailed on her to London via, Adelaide, Durban, Capetown, Las Palmas and Plymouth. I left her in London on the 7th of March, 1909, and re-joined her in London about eight weeks later, and returned  with her to Australia, I was paid off in Sydney in June 1909.

I had no previous experience of ocean- going ships or of Australian Coastal ships before joining the Waratah. I originally joined her so as to have a trip to Scotland to see my relatives there. My home is in Australia, and I left the vessel when she arrived back there.
When I was going to England on her after we passed Albany there were five days of rough weather.I did not like her when she was rolling. When I was down in the bunkers I was just alongside the  starboard portholes in the upper 'tween decks. Sometimes those portholes were not properly fastened something would go wrong with the screws so they could not be fastened tightly. This was not repaired until after about two or three days of the rough weather.There were two or thee portholes that were in this condition. I don't remember now exactly, what was the matter with the screws, but I knew at the time. While they were defective water would come in every time she rolled. (It came in badly) and wet us while we were working. Part of the water ran away down into the bunkers. Each day we swept and bailed out what was left. One day during the five days of bad weather I came out of the forecastle head with my watch (other crewmen) and was going up the ladder by the dining saloon on the port side on my way to the stoke-hold.There was a heavy sea on. It was breaking right over the forecastle head. The sea came right over us, and wet us through several times.I was afraid of being washed overboard. During the five days I am referring to, the Waratah was pitching and rolling badly. She would go right down by the head or the stern, but always came up very quickly. When she was rolling she would some times come back with a gentle swing and sometimes with a jerk.We had another spell of bad weather when we left Capetown this time it lasted four days.The portholes were alright at the time, the ship behaved better than she did off Albany. She pitched just as much as she did before, but did not roll as much. After that we had fine weather for the rest of the voyage to Plymouth. After we left Plymouth it was very rough and windy, but there was nothing about the ships behaviour to remark upon.

When coming out to Australia we had fine weather right through, When going to London the ship had a slight list to starboard. Two or three times Mr.Hamilton, one of the engineers told us to take coal from the starboard side to try to right her, but when we did it made no difference to the list. My belief was the boat was top heavy, and on that account, and because I did not like the way she rolled, and because of the list I was anxious to get out of her. Several times I heard firemen in the engine room talking among themselves and saying that they thought the engines were not to good, and they did not care about it, and they thought something would go bung. This occurred both on the homeward and outward trip, I thought they were trying to frighten me. Sometime after I left the boat, I was in Hobart, it would have been about the middle of July 1909 I think. I met there Mr. Thomas who was a fireman on the Waratah at the time I was on her. I asked him how she got on in Sydney. He said "she was top heavy," and the coal-lumpers refused to coal her because she was all one sided. They refused to go back unless they got double there money.

(sgd) William Craig Marshall.

The foregoing deposition of William Craig Marshall was taken and sworn before me on this 22nd day of March 1910.
(sgd) Archy Dunn J.P.
Justice of the peace.

       ss Ulimaroa which William Marshall was a trimmer on when he made his deposition.

                                     Upper 'tween deck portholes port side , coal was stacked on this deck.

                                                          Ships porthole with screw clamps.

Officers of the Waratah deliberately falsified ships articles.

A lot of criticism by readers  have stated that most of the evidence given by ordinary crew members was heresy and could not relied on after reading newspaper reports of the case.This was combined with the antics of the legal teams in the court room playing the true roll of thespians trying to belittle the less educated working class sailors who knew a great deal more about ships and their ways than their peers examining them. Some depositions by crew members were only partly published in the annex to the main report after being cherry picked for public consumption. Sorting the salt from the meat was a painstaking job and in the following deposition there were sections omitted which did not put the authorities in good light. Digging through the files I came across information which should have been removed but I felt it was overlooked by lazy public servants at the time which gives rise to a partial untruthfulness of the Waratah inquiry. The following deposition was given by a seaman who wanted to leave the Waratah as he felt she was unsafe, his family many years later repeated his claim. This man was articulate more so than some of the seamen or crew interviewed, because when reading their depositions it was obvious that they were dictated by more articulate persons versed in the use of correct language other than that used by  poorly educated seamen.

William Baker was to play a key role in furnishing information regarding the ss Waratah during the second voyage from London to Sydney in 1909. Baker's deposition (herewith) gives the clearest evidence about the stacking of the coal in No.1 tween decks and alley-ways on the vessel's last voyage to Australia,but he says he noticed nothing cranky about the behaviour of the ship. Baker's evidence however must be considered in relation to his experience on sailing ships in which the roll to leeward is, in a heavy wind so persistent and sustained that the top hamper of a sailing ship keeps the vessel almost rail down for days and recovery to windward is always slow. The behaviour of the Waratah on the voyage was not such as to cause Baker any misgivings possibly for that reason. Baker spent much of his time down in the bowels of the ship where the rolling motion is not as severe as one would feel when higher up above deck.

COPY.

WILLIAM HENRY PEARSON BAKER On his oath saith;

I am an able seaman by calling, and at present residing at the Railway Coffee Palace 822 George Street, Sydney, New South Wales. Since the end of June or the beginning of July 1909,I have been employed by Messrs Smith and Tims, Railway contractors in connection with the construction of the North Coast Railway in New South Wales, on the Gloucester to Taree section. Up to the 26th of March last I was working on this section, sleeper cutting and navving (labouring) My postal address while working at Taree was Post Office,Woodside. My father is an engine driver and resides at No.1. Harris Street Southampton street, Camberwell London. The number of  continuous certiicate of discharge issued by the Board of Trade to me is 408119. I am was a seaman on the articles of the ss Waratah on her second voyage to Australia which commenced on the 27th of April 1909, from Gravesend, London. On the 25th of April 1909, while the vessel was laying in the outer basin at the West India Docks London. I went aboard the vessel and saw the chief officer Mr.Owen. I said to him, "are you in want of any hands?" He said " leave your book and see me in the morning when we are signing on." I handed him my book which he took and then I left  the vessel. The following morning 26th, I again went aboard the vessel, and after waiting some time, I saw the chief officer. He then said to me, "well Baker, I could not sign you on as an able seaman because the Board of Trade officer won't sign your book." I said to him why? and he replied "Since you have been paid off from your last ship there have been new rules and regulations. You must have three years continuous service discharge before you can sign on as A.B." My last discharge prior to April 1909 was July 1906 at Cardiff from the barque Queen Margaret- Captain Scott.

                                 The  Barque Queen Margaret which William Baker signed off in 1906. 

 The chief officer said to me "You can sign on as a seaman passage worker. You can get paid off in Sydney, and you could get a good run home in a ship which would pay you."I said "Very good." He told me that I would require to be passed by the doctor before I would be permitted to sign the articles. I left the chief officer and submitted myself for examination by the doctor representing the Board of Trade and was passed medically fit. On that date the 26th April 1909 I signed the ships articles as a seaman but according to the arrangement I had made with the chief officer I was a passage worker. Nothing was said about wages between me and the chief officer, but I understood from what I heard that I would get 1 pound on landing in Sydney. The articles which I signed did not show me as a passage worker, but a seaman. (fraudulent entry by chief officer Owen).  On the 27th of April, I went aboard the vessel with my clothes. The vessel left the West India Docks on that day, and proceeded down river to Gravesend  and anchored in the river for the night. About noon on the 27th when off Gravesend, an inspection of the the vessel was made by by the officers of the Board of Trade and the doctor. Before the inspection, the ships uniform, consisting of a Guernsey and a seaman's cap was issued to me and the other passage workers by the store room steward. This was done on the order of the chief officer, I heard the order. Shortly afterwards, and also before the inspection,the order was issued by the chief officer, "all hands aft for inspection." I and five other passage workers, and the crew of the vessel, mustered aft on the main deck in uniform, I mustering with the seamen. An inspection was made of the muster by the Board of Trade and the doctor. I heard the Board of Trade inspector say after the inspection, "Seamen all correct." I know he was the Board of Trade inspector because I saw the letters B.T with a crown on his cap. The officers then left, and we were ordered to dismiss. Shortly afterwards an order was given - I can't say by whom-for all passage workers to return all uniforms, and I took off the cap and Guernsey, rolled them up and handed them in to the store room steward. No uniform was issued to me afterwards on the voyage. After inspection I was standing on the fore well deck leaning over the rail,and saw two of the ships boats pass around the the bow of the vessel manned by seamen in uniform wearing lifebelts, I didn't take particular notice of the boats. Shortly after the vessel left Gravesend the second engineer came into the fireman's f'ocastle and called out, "Where's Baker" I said stepping forward, "I'm Baker sir." He then said to me, reading from a slip of paper, "Your on the 12 to 4 watch in the stokehold."A passage worker named Cunningham was on the 12 to 4 watch with me in the stokehold. He told me that he had signed as an able seamen but working his passage.He told me he was an able seaman, and had a thee years continuous discharge. He was shown on the list in the forecastle of boat stations as A.B.  A paid coal trimmer,  whose name I forget, completed the number in the 12 to 4 watch. From  the time my watch  in the stokehold was allotted  until the vessel arrive in Sydney, I worked the 12 to 4  watch in the stokehold trimming. I did not particularly notice the behaviour of the ship on the first day, because the work was new to me and employed most of the time in the stokehold. About my third or fourth watch, which would be about the 29th April, I noticed the vessel had a list to port. It was not a very big list, but noticeable. I was in he No.1 'tween decks at the time trimming coal. I noticed the list because I was working in the No.1 tween decks, and had to throw the coal into the pocket of the port side bunker up hill. The next watch, I noticed the vessel had a similar list,but on the starboard side,and my mate who was working that side of he vessel had to throw the coal uphill into the side pocket of the starboard bunker, as I had done the previous watch in regard to the port side bunker, while the coal on my side practically ran itself on this occasion, as it had done with my mate on the previous watch. When we left Gravesend, No.1 'tween decks, for the full width of the ship was forward as far as the fore hatch (No.1 Hold) and passed the engine room towards the stern of the vessel, was filled with coal, to the height of the deck above (the main deck) as near as the trimmers could get, with the exception of the space reserved for the engine room, within the iron bulkheads.

I was working with this coal and the other coal trimmers who were working but not continuously, up to the time the vessel arrived at Capetown. For the first three days after leaving Gravesend, the coal from No.1 'tween decks was used up to feed the main bunker and the side pockets, but after that the coal on the tween decks was used,to feed the No.2 hold (the main hold) where a great quantity of coal was and which was then being used. About a week after leaving Gravesend I heard the second officer say to a lady passenger,referring to the coal in the main hold, "This looks like a coalmine doesn't it?" She said yes." He said "You would not believe it, but there's 4,000 tons of coal there." The coal on the vessel in the main hold practically extended from the top of the main deck to three feet below the stokehold. A water-tight door between the stokehold and the main hold where the coal was stacked, which is about mid-ships, was raised, and we wheeled the coal up from that hold, between two boilers, into the stokehold. The hold where the coal was stacked was forward of the main bunker.There was no hatch on that hold, and as the coal was taken from the bottom, so the coal in the 'tween decks subsided. The list on the vessel made work hard for the trimmer working in the 'tween decks on the side of the list, and the work easier on the side away from the list, and that is how I remember the lists of the vessel from time to time. For about 10 days after leaving Gravesend, the side bunkers were worked in conjunction with the coal in the main hold, but after that time they were not so worked, except occasionally, until all the coal in the main hold had been consumed.The third engineer told me that the coal from the hold was being used because the hold was required at Adelaide for cargo,(lead concentrates) Before the vessel arrived at Adelaide, the coal out of the main hold had been consumed and the seamen were engaged in cleaning it up. At this time however, all the coal that had been stacked in the 'tween decks had not been consumed, only the coal near the hatch coaming of the main hold.The decks around the coamings of the hatch of that hold had been cleared of coal for a distance of about 4 or 5 feet. When the vessel arrived at Adelaide a little more than half the coal in the 'tween decks had been used.When the vessel arrived in Sydney, there was a considerable quantity of coal still remaining on one side of the 'tween decks of the vessel When the vessel left Gravesend, the port and starboard alley-ways of the main deck, the deck above No.1. 'tween decks, from above mid-ships to the back of the bridge, were filled with coal from bottom to to top. The pockets of the side bunkers, and the main bunker were first fed with coal in the alley-ways, and at the end of the fourth day after leaving Gravesend the ally-ways were cleared of coal. So far as I could see, the amount of coal on board and its position in the vessel did not appear to affect the stability of the ship, but we worked coal on the instructions of the second engineer according to the list. The trimming of the coal appeared to control the list, and everything possible to have been done to keep the ship upon an even keel. Sometimes on the voyage the list was noticeable and sometimes the ship was on an even keel. If the ship was rolling it was impossible to say whether she had a list or not, but the roll to leeward seemed to be a longer roll than the roll windward. The  list continued at intervals throughout the voyage, sometimes on on side,and sometimes on the other. I did not consider at any time the list was a serious feature about the vessel.Up tp this time there had been a slight rolling and a slight listing, but Ushant she commenced o roll a great deal. The vessel rolled more to leeward than windward. When the vessel got to the end of a roll to leeward, she seemed to hang over a moment of time,and then appeared to slowly recover herself. The momentary stoppage at the end of the roll was very noticeable, because it was very much like the roll of a sailing ship under full sail of which I have more experience. On the return roll the vessel would hardly go to windward at all. She seemed to be very slow in recovering herself from leeward, and it appeared as if she would remain in that position,the recovery was so slow. I could not always see if the rolling was very heavy because of being so much in the stokehold, where I could only judge of the behaviour of the ship as to how it felt from there. The rolling continued for about two days until the vessel passed the Bay of Biscay, when the weather moderated. I do not think the ship was in any danger at that time, or any time. From there to Adelaide it was practically a fine weather passage, and I noticed nothing particular about the behaviour of the vessel on that part of the voyage. At Melbourne, on arrival of the ship, a considerable time was taken up in berthing the vessel, between four and five hours. This was due to the force of the wind on the top hamper of the vessel. Several hawsers were broken(thick mooring rope lines or steel mooring wires) . One of them as near as I can judge,was a new 8 inch manila rope.One of the strands of  a steel hawser was snapped. A quantity of silver ore cargo was, at Adelaide, put into the hold from which the coal had been taken on the voyage from London.At Melbourne after the vessel had been berthed, she had a list away from the wharf. At Sydney, after she was berthed she had a similar list, but on to the wharf. I noticed nothing particular about the behaviour of the ship between Melbourne and Sydney. The largest derrick I had ever seen on a ship was rigged over No.2.hatch, forward of the bridge. I have seen the derrick during parts of the voyage,(at Capetown and Adelaide) it was rigged with wire falls, she had a heavy "gin" (wheel for a wire rope rope)  on the end of the derrick, which was in mid- air when the derrick was hoisted. I cannot say if the position of the derrick at sea at any time affected the stability of the ship or the list of the vessel, or her behaviour in rough weather.   

   
The black arrow points to the large derrick, the circle shows the steel collar that holds it in place at sea. Other derricks  in picture could lift safely 5 tons, the large derrick was designed to lift 20 tons. At one stage the bosu'n and and some seamen threatened to leave the ship if the derrick was not stowed  on deck when at sea. He claimed it affected the stability of the ship and enhanced the ships rolling when up in the air.

During the voyage boat drill was held every Wednesday, it never lasted longer than ten minutes. According to the boat stations in the list posted up on the board, I was assigned to a position of No.10 boat. On the first occasion, I partly undid the covering of the boat, and while doing so the quartermaster who was in charge of the No.10 boat, gave me the order to fall in. Boat drill was taking place at the other boats at the same time.The covers of the boats were never removed except when they were being painted, nor as far as I know the lashings were never fully undone.The boats were never lifted off the chocks or hoisted into the davits or partly lowered over the side. One of the boats on the port side,No.1 was always swung out for emergency. With the exception of No.1 boat, all boats were lashed each end from clamps on the gunwales to ring bolts on the deck.None of these lashings were undone during the voyage. No instruction was given to me regards station or to any other of the crew,as far as I know, nor were any instruction given to me or any other crew that I heard, as to the method of launching the boats.The boat drill merely amounted to taking up the positions allotted by the lists and no more.No fire drill of any kind was held on board to my knowledge during the whole voyage. I left the ship at Sydney on the 17th of June,1909, and received a very good discharge and ability and conduct, on the termination of the voyage for which I was engaged. I had no misgivings about the seaworthiness of the vessel. While the ship was in Sydney I heard  a call for steam for one of the winches for the purpose of getting some boats out. During the voyage I saw seamen painting some of the lifeboats. The paint appeared to be very thick.I cannot speak as to the condition of the boats. If I signed for the round trip I should have no hesitation in leaving Australia in the Waratah.

(sgd) W.H.P. Baker

The foregoing deposition of WILLIAM HENRY PEARSON BAKER

was taken and sworn and signed at Sydney in the State of New South Wales on the eleventh day of
April, A.D.1910.

Before me (sgd) C.S. Hawkins
A police Magistrate and Justice of the Peace, for the State of New South Wales. 

Mr baker said he would sail in the Waratah again but in fact he only said that to appease the officer questioning him in order to make sure he was reimbursed for his costs of coming to Sydney to assist in the inquiry of the Waratah. Almost a year later we come across a statement made to the press in which he really said why he left the Waratah. By this time of course he was not under any pressure by officials and free to speak his mind. 

Daily Telegraph Launceston Tasmania Thursday 19th January 1911.

                                                             THE WARATAH

Mr. William H.P. Baker of Dover street, Richmond, who was an able seaman on board the missing Waratah on her last voyage to Australia and gave evidence at the inquiry held at Sydney last April, made some very interesting statements to a Melbourne Herald reporter on Monday. They said that he began,that the vessel was not top heavy if the cargo was properly stowed but it had not been stated how the coal had been worked coming out from England. I signed on with seven other men as A.B in London. As soon as the Waratah left the Thames we eight men were sent to trim coal, leaving 8 A.B's short on deck, if anything happened they would have been a watch short. The A.B's down in the hold were trimmers until we got to Sydney. In the Bay of Biscay the Waratah started to roll for two or three days in the only bad weather we experienced for the voyage, but she had a list to port or starboard all the time.I reckoned that she was top heavy. We worked the coal in the 'tween decks,and the main hold was full. After using some of the coal out of the bunkers and some of that in the 'tween decks, we worked the main hold, clearing out by the time Adelaide was reached, so as to take in cargo and leaving coal in the 'tween decks.At Melbourne we took three or four hours to tie up,breaking nearly all the lines, the steamer was lying away from the wharf. At Sydney the Waratah lay right over the wharf. I heard that they had trouble with the stevedores and I left the boat at Sydney, and two or three days later went inland, so cannot say anything about the loading there. Coming out from England no proper boat was held and there were no fire drills,  the boats were in a leaky condition and I saw a man laying paint on thick on one occasion. They wanted it on thick he remarked to me,the paint was running through the seams. Putting the cargo in the main hold as I have described, and filling the 'tween decks with coal, had the effect of making the vessel top heavy,the cargo in the hold being lighter than the coal. We had a 1,000 tons of coal in the main hold when we left London. Why did I leave the Waratah? I was paid off in Sydney, but would have left the ship in any case, I did not like her. When she rolled, instead of behaving herself like a normal vessel, she seemed to hang at an angle, it seemed difficult for her to recover herself after a roll. I reckon after leaving Durban, she got into heavy weather and turned clean over, being unable to recover after being struck by a big sea.

  

                                     William Baker with his wife Francis (nee) Robinson.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Waratah was badly managed at sea and here we have further proof that the faulty lifeboats were not properly fixed after the first voyage, yet were passed a second time by the Board of Trade surveyor Captain Maurice Clark whom I shall deal with and his evidence in a later post.  In my next post I will deal with faulty portholes allowing the ingress of water into the coal on the tween decks. To misrepresent the amount of seamen signed on in itself would have needed the co-operation of Captain Ilbery himself after all it would be his signature on the articles alone.

Note Captain Ilbery's signature bottom right, this agreement was when he last left Adelaide after taking on six crew, all perished with the ship.

   

Was the lighthouse keeper sleeping?

Ships heading for Port Adelaide coming from a westward direction had to pass Kangaroo Island via the Cape Borda lighthouse and the Lloyds signal station situated on the north west point of the island. During daylight hours ships would signal by flags and at night time by Morse lamp. A cannon was situated at the lighthouse  and fired at regular intervals in heavy fog to alert ships of danger and to assist them in determining their position.

 

During the month of June several vessels arrived at the Semaphore anchorage near Adelaide without being reported by the Cape Borda signal station. On June the 6th 1909 the ss Waratah arrived unexpectedly with Captain Ilbery complaining  that no one had been warned of his impending arrival. In his complaint  to the Marine Board he stated that he had signalled Cape Borda on passing and failed to see why he had not been reported. On Thursday the 2nd of July the Marine Board at its meeting heard the President state that he had called for a report from the head keeper, who in reply enclosed a copy of the log for the day mentioned. This showed that the keeper Carrison was on duty from 2am till 8am and he kept a good lookout, and only went into the lighthouse to attend to the light and wind the clockwork. The board concluded that he must have been doing his work between 4am and 4.40am when the Waratah signalled, no action was taken. All messages about shipping from Cape Borda in 1909 were forwarded by telephone, previously to that a telegraph key at the lighthouse was used by an operator known as a telegraph master who was stationed at the light.

                                                             Cape Borda lighthouse residents circa 1909.

Cape Borda lighthouse today with the fog signal cannon which is still fired daily at 12.30pm for visitors  by the resident tourist guide. The cannon was originally situated on the bluff pointing out to sea.

   Yellow arrow points to the small dot (Cape Borda lighthouse) from seaward about 5 miles off.

In August 1907 shipping merchants, agents, stevedores, and passengers complained to the Marine Board about vessels passing Cape Borda and not being reported by apparent neglect of the staff at the signal station. This in turn led to lost time and money by all concerned in the industry at Adelaide. The Marine Board visited the station to look into the complaints, after all this was a Lloyds signal station, some staff changes took place as a result. Not all blame can be attached fully to the lighthouse staff as not all ships passing could be properly identified. The reasons for this is that flags flapping in the wind could not be properly read, ships passing to far off to be recognized by telescope, foggy or hazy weather  with poor visibility at night due to extreme weather conditions. There is of course always one ship that will not identify himself in an effort of getting to the anchorage and hoping to jump the que by bribing officialdom in exchange for the first available berth. It would appear that not being reported by the lighthouse very little may have changed when Captain Ilbery steamed passed on the morning of the 6th of June 1909.

                                          

                       Lighthouse keeper winding up a lighthouse clockwork. (Circa about 1927) 

      

Readers Questions Answered.

Question 1, Mr. Tom Powell of Gold Coast Queensland Australia asks, can you throw some light on the ship Geulph that  read at night a signal T.A.H. which supposedly came from the ss Waratah?

Answer Q 1, Yes there have been many press versions some of them varied and some to create mystery for readers, the following may give you a realistic version about the Guelph on that particular night.

                                                                          ss GUELPH.

                     

                                DEPOSITION OF JAMES NORTHCOTT CULVERWELL,

                                                     MASTER OF THE ss GUELPH.

On the 27th of July 1909, I was in command of the steamship Guelph of Southampton,owned by the Union Castle Steamship Company Limited, and at 9.51 pm that day, (Cape Mean Time). The Guelph was abeam of Cape Hood Light House (Latitude 33 degrees 2 minutes south, Longitude 27 degrees 54 minutes east) at a distance of 8 miles and her course was N 52 Degrees East. At this time my third officer, Mr. Blanchard reported that he had sighted a steamer distant about 5 miles outside the Guelph and bearing S 52 degrees East true of her (Guelph). Mr. Blanchard who was unable to make out the vessels name but reported to me she was a passenger vessel, and the Morse Code he had made out T.A.H  he thought it was the Waratah. She was carrying ordinary navigation lights, but Mr. Blanchard did not report to me how she was heading, or what her speed appeared to be. At that time in question the weather was not clear enough to enable the ship to be seen , and her lights and Morse Code signal  only were seen. The wind was westerly, fresh, moderate and increasing but no sea. The vessel we thought was the Waratah was not in sight fore more than 10 to 15 minutes, and so far as could be judged she was in a position, and on a proper course for Cape Town. The foregoing particulars are entirely from memory but I think they are fairly accurate.

Signed Captain James Northcott  Culverwell,

Sworn 2/2/1910 at St. Michaels Rectory, Cornhill in the City of London, before me H.Martin Holmes,

Commissioner to administer Oath's in the Supreme Court London.

Copy: Deposition 

                                                             

                                                    Mr.Thomas Roskiloy Blanchard

The third officer of the Guelph made a very short affidavit, He claims he was not sure as to the exact
date but said "if the master said it was the 27th in his statement then it must be correct." He further claims he cannot remember which ship signalled first, whether it was him or the Waratah but stated that he was very proficient in the Morse Code. When I endeavoured to signal to the large steamship, the weather was westerly and fresh, but there was no sea on, the next day, when nearer Natal (Durban) the weather became very rough with heavy seas.
All the particulars are from my memory and I believe them to be correct.
Signed Blanchard 3rd mate.

Sworn 24/3/1910 before Ivan Alton Sampson Surveyor of Customs and justice of the peace for The Cape in the Colony of the Cape of Good Hope.


One thing is for sure both men have confirmed there was no storm or heavy sea at the time of passing an unknown ship, I crossed checked this with the entry in the Clan  Macintyre's log book for that  time and a similar weather report was entered, so, no big storm as reported in various articles.Going by the description of the wind force I estimate it was either force 4 or 5 using the Beaufort Scale.

                                         THIS IS THE MOST PROBABLE DESCRIPTION GIVEN.

The above figure shows the Guelph's course in red heading north easterly, the blue course line is heading south westerly which Blanchard thought  was the Waratah. The green lines show the Guelph 8 miles off the light and the other shows a ship 5 miles outside of the Guelph and bearing from her. I do not for one minute believe Blanchard  thought it was the Waratah unless he knew it was on its way to Cape Town, you don't exactly sail a coastline with a list of ships you can expect to meet along the way, unless the information was given to them by the Lloyd's agent in Cape Town. If the ships had been in sight of each other for 15 minutes at most, 5 miles apart and in the sea conditions described, they could have exchanged up to ninety words between them. Every officer wishing to become proficient in lamp signalling had to flash 6 words per minute to satisfy the Board of Trade examinations. After 10 or 15 minutes all Blanchard got was T.A.H from the other ship? I actually think he was whiling away his time talking to another ship and signing off when Capt Culverwell entered the bridge to check on their position from the light house. The other ship ended his message by not saying good by but used the lazy slang (tat ta) or (tat ah)  which was quite common in certain parts of England especially the sea port of Liverpool. 

   
                                                                          ss WARATAH.

Readers Questions Answered.

Question 1. Mr. William Harris of Toronto Canada asks, were there any deaths on the Waratah on her voyages such  as can happen on  modern cruise ships of today?.

Answer Q 1, Yes there were people that died on the maiden voyage but so far as the second voyage it is not known because the  log book went down with the ship.

On the 3rd of December on the maiden voyage outwards from London, a passenger died aboard the ship, a Mr. Wilson from Adelaide. It is understood that he was confined to his bed before leaving England but got up out of his sick bed to join the Waratah thinking the sea voyage would do him good. He was up and about the ship until after leaving Las Palmas when he fell ill again and was confined to the ships hospital. His wife was advised by the ships doctor to take him ashore at Capetown where he thought the man might have a better chance than aboard the ship. Mr. Wilson was a very stubborn man and insisted he stay aboard until he reached Adelaide his home town. The burial was to take place at 8.00 am on the morning of the 4th, after a post mortem had been carried out. The official log book of the Waratah showed the following entry.

                                                                          

                                                       EXTRACT OF LOG BOOK ENTRY.

3/12/08 at 1.30 pm in Latitude 43 degrees 20 minutes South Longitude 57 degrees 30 minutes East,

ALFRED WILSON GULLY aged 36 traveller of Adelaide South Australia died on board. His last place of residence was given as 16 Panton Place Kings Cross London. He had been suffering acute rheumatism but died of heart failure. At 8.00 am on the 4/12/08 in Latitude 43 degrees 26 minutes South Longitude 63 degrees 12 minutes East his body was committed to the deep. The service was conducted by the Bishop of Riverina.

Note; He was shown as Alfred Wilson on the passenger list and Gully was offered up as his full name by his widow. Mr. Gully was the son of Win and J. Gully of Adelaide and left behind two sisters named Edie and Mabel.

The next death entry given in the log book occurs when the Waratah was in the South Indian Ocean homeward bound via Durban and Capetown.
               
                                                         EXTRACT OF LOG BOOK ENTRY.
7.15 am 25th January 1909 at sea, Latitude 35 degrees 05 minutes South, Longitude 115 degrees 15 minutes East, ELIZA BRADLY, a third class passenger passed away. Her occupation was given as house keeper from Reading England. Her last place of residence was given as 60 Bridge Street Sydney N.S.W. She was discovered by her room mate and friend Miss Elizabeth Woollet to be dead in her berth. On the doctor being summoned, he pronounced her to have died some hours previously and the cause of death, Primary (Morbus Cordis), secondary, heart failure. At 4.00 pm at sea in Latitude 35 degrees 02 minutes South Longitude 114 degrees 20 minutes East on the same day, the body was committed to the deep. The Church of England burial service was read by Captain Ilbery.

It interesting to note that perhaps Eliza Bradly must have had some idea of her impending death as she penned a letter bequeathing her possessions to her dear friend Miss Elizabeth Woollet who produced the note to the doctor. After consultation between Captain Ilbery and the doctor the possessions of Eliza Bradly were released to Elizabeth Woollet her close freind.  

                                                         EXTRACT OF LOG BOOK ENTRY.

A male and one female were stillborn at separate intervals to MARTHA STONE of Maritzburg, South Africa. The father is named as HERBERT WILLIAM  STONE, a soldier in South Africa. Burial at sea was two days out of Durban.
The log book entry was short and no further details were recorded, apart from the fact Waratah sailed from Durban on the evening of the 9th of February and ran head on into heavy seas on the way to Capetown. The ship struggled at times against the head seas which must have added to the uncomfortable time Mrs Stone was having with her unfortunate births.

    
A sea burial aboard the Blue Anchor Line ship Wakool in 1908, the man with the bald spot on the right with the bible in his hand is Captain S.W. Warren who read the service. The photo is believed to be taken by G.W. Hodder who was a keen amateur photographer and was the ships chief engineer at the time. He was later to lose his life aboard the ss Waratah as chief engineer when she disappeared in 1909 with all hands. 

                                                     G.W. HODDER CHIEF ENGINEER.