The complaint is not specific as to time and place so cannot be definitely refused. However, the inspectors at annual and reinspections examine the boat falls and require renewals when found necessary. Seaman complains also about the manner and methods of conducting boat drills, claiming that lifeboat crew was not properly instructed by licensed officers; that the licensed officers were inexperienced and had no real sea experience. He cites as an example the conditions on the Clyde and Mallory Line ships, stating that deck boys are not sailors but brass shiners, and are quickly promoted to quartermasters, thence to third mate without ever having the proper experience. The Bureau's regulations for the conduct of fire and boat drills are most specific. The Bureau's inspectors and traveling inspectors when available are continually checking up on the methods and adequacy of the drills conducted, the knowledge of the licensed officers concerning such drills and the means provided on each particular ship to cope with an emergency. Especially during the past three years, the Bureau has stressed the necessity for more thorough training of ship's crews, and in this connection the necessity for a larger number of traveling inspectors to check on such matters. Regarding the complaint in tnis connection, that of rapid promotions without proper experience, the Bureau knows of no way in which such matters can especially be corrected. The Bureau, is, however, setting up a new system of examinations for licensing officers which will, it is hoped, raise the standard. NO. 27. S. S. "CITY OF HAMBURG" Seaman complains that during several fire drills on the above ship the fire hose broke on three occasions. The Bureau has investigated this complaint and has secured an affidavit from Captain Joseph E. Lee, master, and G. S. Moon, chief officer, also submitted an affidavit. These men both state that fire hose are only used for drill purposes and that to their knowledge only one fire hose let go and that this occurrence was due to the hose clamp coupling being insecurely fastened. From the investigation, the complaint concerning the fire hose is almost without foundation. Seaman complains of conditions in general aboard ship, the food, etc., and further that there are other ships operated by the same company which have cracked plates in their side amidship which are patched over with rubber. The local inspectors at Baltimore made an annual inspection of the City of Hamburg on July 23, 1936, and in the report of the inspectors it appears that crews quarters and mess rooms were found in an excellent condition and members of the crew who were aboard the ship the time the complaint was made, i. e., April 23, 1936, stated "That they had no complaint of the manner in which they had been treated by the officers and that their food and qaurters were satisfactory." The report further indicates that the hose and other equipment met all the requirements of the Bureau regulations. Examination of the report of the inspectors further indicates that the food served the crew as indicated by the menus is well balanced. In regard to the statement that several ships on the Baltimore Mail Steamship Line are operated with cracks in their sides amidships, which cracks are painted over and are not noticed by the inspectors, this is highly improbable. There are five ships operated by the Baltimore Mail Line, the names of which are set forth below: City of Baltimore. City of Newport News. All of these ships are classed by the American Bureau of Shipping and are therefore required to undergo periodical surveys required by classification societies in addition to annual inspection made by the field offices of this Bureau. It is exceedingly doubtful that the master or other licensed officers, knowing of this condition, would fail to report such condition to the inspectors. NO. 28 S. S. "HAITI" Complainant alleges that during February 1936 while employed on the above steamer the fire buckets were empty and that this condition continued during that trip and the next. In an executive committee meeting in September 1935 the board of supervising inspectors deleted the requirements that fire buckets be carried on any vessel under the jurisdiction of the Bureau. substituted. Additional fire extinguishers were The Bureau finds no violation of the law or the rules and regulations. NO. 29. S. S. "SUN DANCE" Seaman complains that aboard the above steamer lifeboats were so frozen to the chocks that thirty minutes were required to launch one boat. He further complains that he was injured because a hook holding a watertight door back in its normal position was rusty, and the door was tied up with a piece of electric wire. He claims that when he was going through the door the ship rolled and the door slammed shut severely injuring him. A full investigation of this complaint indicates first that upon the vessel's arrival in Charleston, South Carolina, the inspectors held a boat drill unannounced and the boat was swung out in one minute forty-five seconds. An investigation indicates that Walters was hurt in some manner aboard the ship, but does not indicate that licensed officers were in any way negligent. Affidavits from members of the crew indicate that the hook was broken at the time the accident is alleged to have occurred but was immediately renewed. Investigation further indicates that the hook was broken off, and broken off by a sharp blow which caused a clean break. The hook was not rusted off as alleged. There is no violation of the law or the Bureau's regulations. The complainant states that while employed as able seaman aboard the above steamer on September 3, 1935, when the ship went to the assistance of the S. S. Dixie, which vessel was aground off the coast of Florida, he states that it was necessary to use the motor lifeboat and that after getting in the water they were unable to start the motor for a period of eight hours and that the motor was badly clogged with sediment. The Bureau has on file the sworn statements of three mates who were aboard the ship and were handling the motor boat at the time. Mr. George B. Service who was the chief mate on the S. S. Atenas states that the gasoline line in the motor boat did clog due to accumulation of sediment and there was some trouble keeping the engine running. However, the motor boat carried out its mission of proceeding to the Dixie and returning with another boat containing 20 of the Dixie's passengers in tow. On the way back they were unable to run the motor and the boat containing the passengers was taken in tow by another motorboat from the S. S. Warbler, a wrecking vessel, operated by Merritt and Chapman. Seaman complains that another lifeboat was launched by the Atenas and that the life lines attached to the span line between the davits were rotten and that the lifeboat painters were rotten and had to be renewed. The Bureau secured affidavits from the second and third officers of the S. S. Atenas, which are quoted below: OCTOBER 7, 1936. At 3:05 p. m. September 4, 1935, I, Warren L. Burget, was second officer on the Atenas and was the officer in charge of No. 3 boat which went to the aid of the S. S. Dixie. The equipment of the boat was in good condition and painters and life lines had been renewed at the beginning of the voyage to conform with Supplement No. 52 of the Inspection Service. Consequently any assertion that poor equipment was in operation would be false. While taking this boat on board I relieved the falls of my own weight by lifting myself hand over hand on a life line and during the procedure of both lowering away and returning on board I found no equipment in any condition but the best. (Signed) Sworn to before me this 7th day of October 1936. WARREN L. BURGET. W. B. FOSTER, Notary Public, Kings County. OCTOBER 7, 1936. Previous to this life lines and sea painters had been renewed on all boats to conform with new steamboat inspection regulations. New line had been supplied for Lyle gun, and the Lyle gun line on board at that time being in good condition was used for life lines and spans. Span lines and painters did not part and were not in bad condition and were not renewed at this time. (Signed) GEORGE N. AXITOES. Sworn to before me this 7th day of October 1936. W. B. FOSTER, Notary Public, Kings County. NO. 31. S. S. "AMERICAN SHIPPER" Seaman complains that during the inspection of the above vessel in New York during July 1936, the inspector in examining the pontoon lifeboats found that No. 4, a Lundin type lifeboat, was in such condition as to be unseaworthy and that No. 3 boat was in similar condition. He further alleges that because of the unseaworthiness of these two lifeboats, the total complement of the ship, passengers and crew, 155 in all, were dependent during that voyage on two 50-person lifeboats. Investigation by inspectors of the New York office reveals, according to the inspector's record, that the deficiencies alleged in the complaint did not exist during 1936, but during the same dates in 1935, the boat referred to, No. 4, was in need of repairs and was replaced before the date set by the inspector. The man who made the inspection states that the boat was not in such condition as to be unseaworthy, having a short period of time until a replacement could be made. Apparently the complainant is of the opinion that he was better qualified to judge the seaworthiness of the lifeboat than the inspector. The Bureau finds no violation of the law or the Bureau's rules and regulations. NO. 32. S. S. "SOUTHERN CROSS" Seaman complains that the motorboat davits when used for a new and heavier motor lifeboat were of insufficient strength to bear the weight of boat and passengers and that the davit was repaired at sea by members of the ship's crew. This matter was investigated on August 5, 1936, and the following is noted from the inspector's report: "This boat was lowered, loaded to capacity in accordance with rule III, section 39, Oceans, on June 8, 1936. Davits held the combined weight of boat and passengers satisfactorily. "All lifeboats except #8 may be swung out without first being raised. The chief mate states that #8 lifeboat is to be changed this voyage." The master, upon cross-examination, admitted that a steel plate was put on the davit by members of the crew while the vessel was at sea. Further investigation indicates that this strengthening plate was placed upon the piece of the davit in order to prevent the gears of the davit from fouling the davit frame. According to the investigation, the inspectors were satisfied that the davit was in suitable condition for the vessel to proceed to sea. NO. 32, 38, AND 108. S. S. "SOUTHERN CROSS" A further investigation of these complaints shows that a new motor lifeboat was installed, which lifeboat was equipped with a radio and a searchlight to comply with the requirements of the 52nd Supplement. The new boat was 26 feet long, 7 feet 8 inches in beam, and 3 feet 3 inches in depth, with a capacity of 401 cubic feet, and allowed 26 persons. This boat replaced a boat which was 24 feet 2 inches in length, 7 feet 7 inches in beam, and 3 feet 4 inches in depth, with a capacity of 377 cubic feet, and allowed 37 persons. There was approximately 200 pounds difference in weight of the two boats. The complainant alleges that it was necessary to move the davits approximately four feet each way. However, upon investigation it was found that it was only necessary to move the after davit 2 feet 3 inches to take care of the additional length of the boat. In the matter of installing a steel plate on the davit, this plate was installed to act as a guide for the geared quadrant at the lower end of the davit. This was done and clearance rings were also installed to prevent any fore and aft movement of the davit caused by wear on the gear. These davits attached to this boat were raised 7 inches above the deck to permit the boat to be swung out without lifting from the chocks, which is required by the rules and regulations. Before the vessel proceeded to sea, and upon completion of this installation, an inspector from the New York office tested the installation as required by section 17 of rule III, General Rules and Regulations, and found the same to be satisfactory and in a seaworthy condition. The aforementioned test consisted of lowering the boat to the water with a full capacity of persons and equipment. Attached are two photographs showing steel plate used as a guide, and the blocks installed to raise the davits 7 inches. There does not appear to be any violation of the rules and regulations. NO. 33. S. S. "SANTA CLARA" Seaman alleges that motor lifeboat out of trim due to the installation of radio set in the fore part of the boat causing boat to be unnavigable and unseaworthy. He further claims that releasing gear on this boat did not work. The Bureau secured an affidavit from Mr. S. E. Koppang, first officer of the Santa Clara, together with an actual test carried out on the boat in question by local inspectors at New York. The statement of the chief officer shows that this incident must have taken place on March 9, 1936, in the harbor of Antofagasta, at which time the motor boat was lowered into the water and tested. The affidavit states that there was no difficulty with the engine; that the weight of the equipment did not cause the propeller to come out of the water; that there was no trouble with the releasing gear. The information obtained at an actual test conducted in the harbor of New York indicates that the boat is trimmed about an inch by the stern when light. In this condition the tip of the propeller blade is about two inches above the water, but if the boat contained its full complement of persons the tip of the blade would be about 6 inches below the water level. Investigation shows quite definitely that this complaint is without foundation. NO. 34. "AMERICAN FARMER" Seamen complains that the motor lifeboat engine on the ship gave considerable trouble and that the releasing gear on the motor boat was so rusty that it took two men with a hammer and scraper 15 minutes to clear it. He further claims that the boat and its gear was passed by an inspector. An affidavit obtained from M. McKenzie, chief officer of the S. S. American Farmer, states: "In reference to complaint that the releasing gear on the motor lifeboat of this vessel was rusty and that there were two men with hammers and scrapers working fifteen minutes to release it is untrue. I personally supervise at fire and boat drills all equipment and I do not permit such defects. The engine in motor boat is under supervision of the chief engineer, and maintained by the first assistant engineer and his staff, the engine is kept in good working and running order at all times. (Signed) "M. MCKENZIE, "Chief Officer, S. S. 'American Farmer.' The inspection records of this vessel indicate that Mr. McKenzie has been chief mate during the past two years. An independent investigation made by the local inspectors at New York indicates that at the present time motor boat on this ship is in excellent condition and that the releasing gear is functioning properly. At this investigation the motor was started in less than one minute. The local inspectors at New York have contacted the inspector who conducted the annual inspection at which this occurrence is alleged to have taken place, but this inspector does not recall any such incident. NO. 35. S. S. "NOSA PRINCE" Seaman complains that while serving as boatswain aboard the above steamer, the fire hose were used to wash down the decks and that, because of excessive wear and tear in the process, the ship was at sea without a sufficient number of fire hose to supply all fire hydrants. The seaman further quotes the Bureau's regulations that fire hose shall not be used for any other purpose than fire extinguishing. Violation of this regulation is indeed frequent as owners and operators instruct officers to use the fire hose and, in fact, refuse to provide any other type of hose, and if the deck officer is to keep the ship clean, he is forced to use the fire hose for wash down purposes. The Bureau's inspectors are continually attempting to correct this condition or at least to keep violations at a minimum. The violation referred to above is alleged to have occurred in 1934. An investigation at this late date would prove fruitless. The Bureau's inspectors cannot stay aboard all ships at all times while they are being operated and determine that no regulations are violated. However, officers can be charged with negligence for definite violation. NO. 36. S. S. "ANCON" Seaman complains of the condition of the lifeboats on the above ship stating that many of them have no bottoms due to the fact that they were under repair; and that the ship was allowed to proceed to sea with the lifeboats in this condition. He further states that the bulkheads of the ship are seriously in need of repair and that for this reason it is impossible to touch them with a chipping hammer for fear of damage. Complainant makes various statements in connection with the ship, one in particular in which he alleges that 95 percent of the stewards are Germans without citizenship papers. Also, that the engine-room crew are not competent. In investigating this complaint, the Bureau has secured affidavits from J. Y. Kutchner, chief officer, who has been chief officer of this ship since February 1931, and from Charles J. Manning,who has been chief steward for eight and one-half years, and from William C. Miller, chief engineer. The chief officer states in regard to the lifeboats: "Lifeboats on board are of all steel keels with extra heavy platings. They were put on board as new boats, when the ship was reconditioned in 1925. In the life of these boats we have found partly corroded plates along the bottom strakes, which have been renewed when necessary. At no time were these boats unseaworthy or condemned." An examination of the lifeboats by an inspector at the port of New York on October 18 found the lifeboats in excellent condition. The inspector states, "These boats were originally constructed with steel keels and gunwales, and at no time have there ever been wooden keels." In response to the complainant's statement that bulkheads at present in the ship are rusted away, it should be pointed out that this vessel is now 34 years old and she was built under the American Bureau classification, but her class was discontinued about 20 years ago. On the date of March 25, 1935, the local inspectors at New York were directed to thoroughly survey this ship and her sister ship, The Cristobal, by making a thorough examination at least equivalent to special survey No. 3. In explanation it should be stated that special survey No. 3 requires that actual measurements be taken of the present thickness of the ship's structural members, such as bulkheads, etc. Due to the requirements laid down by the Bureau in regard to subdivision, fire protection, etc., the company has agreed to replace both these vessels at an early date with new, modern ships. In regard to the complainant's statement that 95 percent of the steward's department were German aliens, the affidavit from the chief steward states that"Out of a crew of 49 members in the steward's department on the S. S. Ancon at the time in question, there were only two (2) alien Germans with first papers and ten (10) naturalized citizens of German origin, who all spoke English. As regards their openly boasting of retaining their own nationality, such is not the case, as the above statement proves otherwise. "As regards men taking a trip off when Mr. Price, shipping commissioner, signs on the crew, it is ridiculous, as the other commissioners do their duty just as well as Mr. Price, and all men in my department are qualified to sign on, and there have not been any violation of the U. S. immigration laws." After investigation of this complaint, the Bureau can find no violation of the law, the shipping articles, or the regulations. NO. 38. S. S. "SOUTHERN CROSS" See complaints Nos. 108 and 32. NO. 39. S. S. "SOUTHERN CROSS" Seaman alleges that it is impossible to raise the lifeboats high enough above the deck to scrub the deck below; he further states that after several attempts they were unable to raise the boats high enough to scrub the deck properly. Investigation of conditions aboard the Southern Cross in response to this and several other complaints which will be found throughout this report, indicates that the lifeboats are installed and equipped in accordance with the Bureau's regulations and applicable law and statutes. The remainder of the complaint concerns crew's quarters, and work of the scamen in general. The investigation of crew's quarters indicates that all the air ports, etc., are fitted with proper glasses and dead lights. An inspection under date of May 21, 1937, by a principal traveling inspector of the Bureau, indicates that crew's quarters on the above vessel are adequate and properly equipped in accordance with law and applicable regulations. |