Land Po
4.
tement Mr. Jairus. Both, however, undertake the defence of the department and comment on the Evidence at the inquest. The main question is as to the goodness of the provisions - their insufficiency towards the end of the voyage, considering that it exceeded by 24 days the period for which the Law required that the ship should be provisioned, would not necessarily have implied any fault on the part of the clearing Officer.
4. In respect to the condition of the provisions, Mr. Thomsett quotes the description given of them by the Master, which is contradictory on some essential points, and his observation that the crew had precisely the same food as the Emigrants. But the Master also states, as Mr. Thomsett does not quote, that "the crew's meals were better preserved and are now quite good". As regards the evidence of John Hennessy, the store keeper, Mr. Thomsett argues that it is contradictory because while he says that the beef and fish were not good from the first, he admits that "when put on board" the beef looked pretty well and the "fish good". I do not think there is any evidence, especially contradiction in this witness's statement, as he adds "I should judge that it...
70
...miscellaneous...
B
H