LORD MUSKERRY, who had given notice "To call attention to the case of the second officer of the ss. 'Firth of Forth,' who, at the Board of Trade inquiry into the stranding of this steamer was found to have acted throughout in a careful and intelligent manner, and much impressed the Court by the way in which he gave his evidence, the Court suggesting to the solicitor to the Board of Trade that the Board might very properly reimburse this officer for the legal expenses incurred by him in attending the inquiry; and to ask if this recommendation has been acted upon, and, if not, why not"—said: My Lords, this is a case where Mr. Stobbs, the second officer of the "Firth of Forth," acquitted himself in a most creditable manner, both before the stranding of the vessel and afterwards in giving evidence at the Board of Trade inquiry; in fact, the Court stated that he was the only one who really came out of the inquiry satisfactorily. This inquiry involved the suspension of the certificate of the officer in question, one of the questions submitted by the Board of Trade to the Court being—
Was serious damage to the ss. 'Firth of Forth' caused by the wrongful act or fault of the master, chief, or second officers, or any of them?7 Therefore this officer, in self-protection, was compelled to secure legal assistance in order to avoid what might have been very serious consequences in the cancellation or suspension of his certificate. He was consequently not only subjected to great anxiety, but to serious expense, which, on the Court's recommendation, should justly be recouped by the Board of Trade, who were the responsible party in detaining him for the inquiry. Masters and officers are readily enough punished, but when meriting encouragement and assistance they generally fail to receive it. I hope to hear that in this case the Board of Trade have acted on the most praiseworthy recommendation of the Court of inquiry, and that an officer who has so ably conducted his duties shall not be allowed to bear the burden of legal expenses incurred in protecting his professional reputation owing to the action of the Board of Trade.
LORD WOLVERTONAS this is purely a Departmental question I will content myself with reading the answer of the Board of Trade. "The recommendation referred to by the noble Lord as to reimbursing to the second officer of the steamship 'Firth of Forth' his legal expenses in attending the inquiry held into the stranding of that vessel has not been acted upon. The Board of Trade have no funds out of which they can defray such expenses, and the fact that an officer has acted properly and given his evidence in a straightforward manner would not, in the opinion of the Board of Trade, in itself justify them in making a special application to the Treasury in such a case."