322
THE HONGKONG GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, MAY 25, 1917.
No. 242.
Additions to the list of persons authorised by the Governor under Section 9 (1) of the Medical Registration Ordinance, 1884, to sign certificates of the cause of death for the purposes of the Births and Deaths Registration Ordinance, 1896.
1st Class Sub-Assistant Surgeon ABINASH CHANDRA DE, I.S.M.D. 2nd Class Sub-Assistant Surgeon SHAIKH SAADAT ALI, L.S.M.D.
No. 243. The following Finding of the Marine Court of Inquiry held on the 10th, 14th, 15th, 17th and 18th May, 1917, to enquire into the circumstances of misconduct on the part of Mr. W. J. STOKES, Chief Engineer of the British Steamship Pheumpenh, is published for general information.
FINDING.
In this case a number of charges have been brought by the Master against the Chief Engineer, extending over a period of two months. Certain of these charges are of a trifling nature and in the opinion of this Court should never have been formulated. We therefore propose to deal only with the principal charges as follows :--
On March the 6th when at Cape St. James the Master states that the Chief Engineer came on the Bridge and spoke to him in a disrespectful and insolent way, addressing him before the 2nd Mate, Pilot and Quarter Master as "Mr. Man", and questioning his right to delay the ship for hour, and finally ended up by saying "Not guilty this time, don't do it again". There is a conflict of evidence here. The Chief Engineer admits addressing the Master as "Mr. Man", but says it was in the privacy of the Chart House, and it was only in jest. The Court consider that this manner of addressing the Master officially is contrary to all good discipline, but as this form of address seems to have been the common practice of the Chief Engineer for a considerable time, we are of opinion that the Master should have taken proper steps early in his command of this ship to have stopped this objectionable familiarity.
Again on the 28th March the Chief Officer was logged for being drunk and the Chief Engineer when asked by the Master refused to sign the Log. The Court are of opinion that under the circumstances then ruling on board it was clearly the Chief Engineer's duty to sign the Official Log and assist the Master to keep discipline in the ship.
On March 29th the Chief Engineer is charged whilst at Saigon with having inter- fered with the loading of the ship. There is no evidence to prove that this was so, and is denied by Mr. Stokes, but it is proved that the Chief Engineer did threaten to leave the ship with all his engineers if any more cargo was put on board, and it is also proved by a document signed by the Chief Engineer that the ship was not over loaded at this time. So that we consider this was an act of misconduct on the part of Mr. Stokes.
April 9th, 10th and 11th. The Master states in his evidence that he gave the Chief Engineer orders on the 9th of April for certain reasons not to make any test with the drinking water publicly. Here there is a conflict of evidence. Mr. Stokes states that no such orders were ever given to him, and that he had no idea there was any trouble con- nected with the drinking water until the 11th of April, when he was heavily logged. No evidence has been produced to prove that such order was ever given to the Chief Engineer, and as most of the Master's orders to the Engine Room appear to have been given in writing this is particularly noticeable. Also Dr. Arculli in his evidence states that during the three days, i.e., 9th, 10th and 11th April, the Chief Engineer brought samples of drinking water to the Master daily for inspection. The relationship existing between the Master and Chief Engineer during this period appeared to be quite friendly,
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.