HL Deb 25 July 1889 vol 338 cc1240-2
LORD COLVILLE OF CULROSS

My Lords, I rise to ask whether the Board of Trade will renew the application which they recently made to the Trinity Corporation, and ascertain if they still decline to remove the obstacle to navigation and anchorage in Cowes Roads which they have created by the sinking of the ship Astracana. On the 28th June I called the attention of the House to the same subject, and was then told that the Board of Trade had no power to compel the Trinity Board to remove the wreck. I was in hopes that, as the obstruction of the shipping anchorage at Cowes was produced solely by the act of the Trinity Board, they would consider it their duty to remove it. A month has elapsed, and nothing has been done; the wreck still remains in a most inconvenient position with a buoy above it. The Trinity Board informed the Board of Trade that on the 25th of June there were 17 feet clear all over the wreck at low water spring tides, and nothing above the level of the sand. But I am glad to say I am in a position to give your Lordships a little further information. The Local Board of Cowes have employed an experienced diver who last week made six visits to the wreck, and instead of finding nothing above the sand (according to the Trinity version), he reported a great quantity of loose wreckage which might be raised without difficulty, and some timber upright, and fixed, quite five feet above the ground. He also said:— If a vessel anchored there, she would never see her anchor again. The upright pieces of timber are very dangerous to vessels passing over the wreck—particularly to coasting vessels drawing more than 10 feet at low water. The Trinity Board stated that there were 17 feet of water over the wreck at low water. The Local Board have had most careful soundings made (which correspond with the report of the diver), and they show that instead of 17 feet of water there were only 11 feet over the wreck. It certainly is not to the credit of the Trinity Board, whose functions are supposed to be the protection of navigable channels and anchorages along the coast, that they should create this obstruction and then refuse to remove it. I beg to call your Lordships particular attention to the fact that some time since they called for tenders for the purchase of the wreck; but they now ignore the obligations which they then imposed upon the purchaser—namely, that the wreck should be removed within a given time. My Lords, the Trinity Board are not represented in this House, but I see here several noble Lords who are Elder Brethren, and I should be very happy if they will stand up and explain the conduct of the Trinity Board. I am compelled to put my question to the noble Lord who represents the Board of Trade, and I hope he will give me a more satisfactory answer than I received on the last occasion.

* LORD BALFOUR

My Lords, when notice was given of this question I at once communicated with the representatives of the Trinity House in London, and I had an interview with a gentleman who came from their office to see me a few days ago. To-day the information, which I will read to the House, has been furnished by the Trinity Board—I will give it in their own words:— Memorandum on the Wreck Astracana. It has been already explained that when this wreck was found floating bottom up, and extremely dangerous to shipping, endeavours were made to sink it, but without success. It may be added that as the cargo proved to be oil it would have been impossible to sink her without breaking up, running the risk of sending large fragments free, and multiplying the risk to navigation. It has also been explained that the wreck was not voluntarily taken to Cowes, and it may be further stated that it was in such an unmanageable condition that the Trinity House officers were simply able to take her along with the tide and beach her at the first opportunity. As the fore-end of her keel was bent obliquely by their efforts to sink her, when once beached she could not be moved. When the process of recovering cargo was completed the Trinity House invited tenders for the purchase and removal of the hull, but no offers being received, they proceeded with that work themselves, and on June 20th it was reported by their diver that nothing remained above the mud. A few days since the Trinity House, being informed that, probably by the action of the tide and weather having disturbed the wreckage, some portions are sticking up and dangerous, gave instructions to resume operations to remove them, and a diver has to-day been sent to assist in the work. The Trinity House wish it to be understood that they are not at all indifferent to the convenience and safety of vessels frequenting Cowes Roads, but that the cost of entirely removing this wreck is estimated at £1,000, and they are anxious to guard against a needless expenditure of public money. Their superintendent at Cowes has been also instructed to watch the wreck, and remove any portions which may become dangerous. I hope that answer will be satisfactory to the noble Lord and those whom he represents. It shows, at any rate, that the Trinity House are making every effort to repair the mischief caused by the vessel sinking in that position; and I hope that the operations will have a satisfactory result.