WHITEWASH.

The Brisbane Courier, Saturday 20 May, 1911.

LOSS OF THE YONGALA

QUESTION OF AN INQUIRY.

COASTAL LIGHTING.

THE PORTMASTER'S REPORT.

IMPORTANT PROPOSALS.

SEARCH FOR THE VESSEL.

The attention of the Hon. D: F. Denham

(State Premier) was yesterday drawn to

the statement of the Adelaide Marine

Board, published in our columns of that

date, in reference to the proposed inquiry

into the loss of the Yongala. Mr. Denham

said : "Until we receive an answer from

the South Australian Government our

hands are tied. The proper authority to

institute an inquiry into the loss of the

Yongala is the Marine Board at the port

of registration, which in the case of the

Yongala was Adelaide, and courtesy 

demands that we should inquire through

their Government what action is being

taken there. If the matter published in

the 'Courier' proves to be the answer

that we are to get from the South Australian 

Government, then the Queensland

Government can act by appointing a

Royal Commission of Inquiry, and such a

course I certainly propose to adopt should

such be the answer we receive. I think

it quite desirable that we should have all

the information that can be gleaned, and

in the public interests I shall not hesitate 

to take action if it is left to us to do so."

"The decision of the South Australian

Marine Board not to hold an inquiry

concerning the loss of the Yongala was

brought under the notice of Captain

Mackay (chairman of the Queensland

Marine Board) yesterday afternoon.

Captain Mackav replied, "With all due 

respect to the Marine Board of South 

Australia, and admitting that it devolves

upon the Marine Board of Queensland to

hold an inquiry into any disasters taking

place on the coast of Queensland; never-

theless, in the absence of any evidence,

tha total disappearance of the ship, and

the rumour that the stability had been

impaired by the removal of sundry iron

ballast, I am still of the opinion that the

inquiry should have been held at Adelaide,

her home port, where evidence respecting

such allegations would be more likely to

be obtained than at Brisbane. -

"Referring to the president's (Mr. Searcy) 

concluding remarks that the request by 

the Premier of Queensland for an inquiry 

was altogether superfluous, I would 

respectfully remind him that the Waratah 

disappeared, under similar circumstances 

to the Yongala, on the South African coast, 

but no inquiry followed until after many 

months spent in collecting evidence in the 

Australian and South African ports. The inquiry 

was then held in London, the port of registration."

"The remarkable statement that while

there was no limit to the power of any

Marine Board to hold an inquiry, there

was a restriction in regard to enforcing

any finding has no revelancy to this matter."

The loss of the Yongala was a hot potato and Adelaide, Port of registration 'did not wish to assume the responsibility' of dealing with the potential evidence of instability. The Inquiry into the loss of the Waratah convened more than a year and a half after the incident. If one compares the two Inquiry transcripts it becomes painfully obvious that the Marine Board of Queensland kept matters as brief as possible:

The specifications presented at the Inquiry were limited with no specific reference to Yongala's maximum draught relative to the draught figures, departure Flat Top, 23 March.

No attempt was made to document the exact GM figures and righting angles of Yongala under various conditions of lading, more importantly the figures relating to the final voyage.

Witness statements were omitted, only appearing in the Press, which reports were prone to error. 

The history of the ship, including losing deck cargo in a gale, was omitted. No cross examination was carried out regarding the safety of carrying significant tonnage on deck and the legal ramifications thereof. 

Captain Knight's past track record, including the Glanworth disaster and his habit of using the inshore passage through the Whitsundays in all weathers, was not explored in detail. 

GM figures for Yongala with or without the pig iron ballast did not receive attention and no reference was made to the fact that periodically Yongala was used on the Western Australia run after the pig iron was removed. If Yongala was not inherently top heavy why was the pig iron needed at all in the first place? 

No attempt was made to explain why Captain Dawson anchored off Repulse Island due to the same weather conditions some 100 n miles south of the so-called limited cyclone, 30 miles in diameter. Such exploration could have revealed more information about the hybrid nature of the system.

Steamers like Yongala were designed to accommodate first class passengers in elevated comfort, increasing the top heaviness factor. But for this to be safe sufficient dead weight cargo was required to ensure stability. But enough heavy cargo was not always available on the coastal routes. 

All things said the Inquiry into the loss of the Yongala was largely a whitewash affair. This could not have brought much comfort to the loved ones of those lost with the steamer. At least the issue of lighting along the Queensland Coast received attention and the point was made that in cases of severe storm conditions shipping companies should encourage their masters to seek anchorage shelter.