The Mary Celeste

by Stan Mason

  Flood: At what time of the day did you actually come to anchor in Gibraltar?

  Wright: Between eleven and twelve o’clock one morning. The other ship arrived the following morning.

  He went on to explain that Johnson first sighted the other vessel and that the state of the sails caught his attention. Further details emerged on the pumps and the method of sounding. When the questioning moved to the binnacle, Pisani became more interested in Wright’s responses. He pressed this point on re-examination.

  Pisani: Where was the compass?

  Wright: In the binnacle. The compass was destroyed.

  Pisani: Now that is strange! Mr. Deveau claimed that “a compass was found on board afterwards”. What do you say to that?

  Wright: Any force that would remove the binnacle would destroy the compass.

  Pisani: But it was still in the binnacle.

  Wright: Yes, I left it where it was. I did nothing to it, although the glass cover of the compass was knocked off.

  After a volley of questions which really led nowhere, Solly Flood realised he was making no headway with the witness and allowed the Registrar to read back the evidence in brief for the Second Mate to affirm. The Court then recessed before continuing in the afternoon with the evidence of Charles Lund.

  On return to the Court, Solly Flood appeared irritated and showed his feelings by complaining to the Judge that he had previously asked to examine the Log of the Dei Gratia but this request was one with which no one had complied. He was promised that the Exhibit would be made available, but it was clear that the Queen’s Proctor was wholly aggrieved at the failure to find a solution to the mystery, and more than likely frustrated in the knowledge that he would never even get near to solving it in Court.

  Charles Lund was sworn in by Henry Pisani, who appeared to be less than inclined to develop any theories or argument. Consequently, the Proctor became determined to keep the proceedings short.....a view hardly shared by Solly Flood. Pisani posed a number of domestic questions to the able seaman, sitting down after a short while, proving without a shadow of a doubt that his interest in the witness was minimal. Solly Flood continued the session vigorously and began a flurry of questions.....almost in the form of an attack.

  Flood: How many windows on each side of the cabin?

  Lund: Two, I think; one on each side. There was wood and canvas nailed over the glass of the window on the starboard side.

  Flood: Were the windows on the port side covered with wood and canvas?

  Lund: I can’t say whether they were or not.

  Flood: Are you telling the Court that you spent a week on that ship and you can’t remember a significant fact about the windows? Did you see any glass broken in the windows or in the skylight?

  Lund: I can’t speak what I am not sure about. I cannot say not being sure but I didn’t see any glass broken. The skylight was open; one pane of glass in it was split down.

  The Queen’s Proctor persisted strongly for over an hour without making very much headway, searching harder and harder as he proceeded.

  Flood: Did you find any boats on the Mary Celeste?

  Lund: No.

  Flood: How many had there been?

  Lund: I can’t say. I’m sure there had been a boat at the main hatch from the fixings there.

  Flood: What about the stern davits?

  Lund: I can’t say whether there had been any boat there either. I couldn’t see any tackle to the davits; the boat had lain across the main hatch. I remember seeing a spar lashed across the stern davits from one side to the other.

  Flood: Could a boat have been lashed there?

  Lund: I think there might have been a boat as well as a spar lashed to the stern davits.

  The evidence was read back to Lund who stated it to be correct, and Sir James Cochrane declared the Vice-Admiralty Court adjourned until the following day, Saturday the twenty-first of December, 1872. Before the session came to a close, however, Solly Flood was back on his feet again, complaining that he had still not had the opportunity to examine the Log of the Dei Gratia. The matter was taken by the Judge as rhetoric, but he listened more carefully to the next plea by the Queen’s Proctor.

  “I wish to make a formal request to this Honourable Court to order a special survey of the vessel known as the Mary Celeste by a surveyor of shipping and a diver. If the Court so wishes, I would be honoured to present myself at such a survey to ensure that it is carried out satisfactorily.”

  Sir James Cochrane dwelt on the submission briefly and gave it full authority by ordering the survey to be carried out as quickly as possible. Ultimately, this was set for Monday, the twenty-third of December to be conducted by John Austin, Surveyor of Shipping in Gibraltar, and Ricardo Portunato, a diver. Accompanying Mr. Flood, to make certain the matter would be conducted very thoroughly, both internally and externally, would be Thomas J. Vecchio, Marshal of the Court.

  On Saturday, the twenty-first of December, the Court reconvened and the Recorder announced: “the further examination of the witnesses on behalf of the Dei Gratia salvors is proceeded with this day”. Augustus Anderson took the stand and was sworn in. He claimed he was on watch when the Mary Celeste was sighted. He confirmed that he had sailed to the derelict on the second journey. Pisani asked very few questions and passed the witness to the Queen’s Proctor who became even more agitated at Pisani’s superficial attitude. Anderson believed that Captain Morehouse had first sighted the derelict.

  Flood: You say the Captain drew your attention to the other ship?

  Anderson: Yes.

  Flood: Isn’t that unusual for a Captain to sight a ship when others are on watch?

  Anderson: Maybe. It does happen.

  Flood: It certainly would if he was looking in a particular direction for a specific ship, wouldn’t it?

  Apart from this interesting sinister insinuation.....that Captain Morehouse was looking for the Mary Celeste in the knowledge she would be somewhere in that region.....the ground covered thereafter was old evidence. Eventually, Solly Flood sat down obviously dissatisfied with the responses by the witnesses, leaving the Judge to press on with another line of questioning.

  Sir James: Was the vessel in a fit state to go round the world with a good crew and good sails?

  Anderson: Yes.

  Sir James: When were you last in the Straits of Gibraltar?

  Anderson: I was never in the Straits before.

  Sir James: Not from New York?

  Anderson: I shipped on board my vessel at New York, but never made this voyage before.

  Sir James: Strange! It would appear that the crew of the Dei Gratia were particularly selected because they had not completed this journey before.

  He turned to the Registrar and requested that the disposition of the witness should be read for confirmation. It was becoming clear that he too was dissatisfied.

  John Johnson was called to the stand but this part of the proceedings proved bizarre because the man was a Russian Lutheran who could understand only a limited amount of English. Sir James was forced to intervene and, following a bitter argument between Pisani and Flood concerning the value of an interpreter, Johnson was permitted to remain for a brief while. A little later, Deveau was surprised to be recalled to answer questions on the Log of the Mary Celeste. When that was over, Captain Morehouse was sworn-in.

  Flood: At what time did you see the Mary Celeste?

  Morehouse: I came back on deck about 1 p.m. and saw a sail on the weather bow bearing east-north-east and steering west-south-west.

  Flood: Are you saying you came on deck, raised your glass to your eye and immediately saw the other vessel.

  Morehouse: No, it happened shortly afterwards.

  Flood: And you were the first to see it?

  Morehouse: I think that the wheelm
an, Johnson, might have indicated that a ship was in the distance, but I don’t recall now.

  Flood: That’s a pity! As we cannot make sense of Mr. Johnson or his evidence this matter will remain another mystery. In which direction was the Dei Gratia proceeding?

  Morehouse: South-east-half-east, on the port tack.

  Flood: How far away would you say was the other vessel?

  Morehouse: About six miles distant, and on the starboard tack.

  Flood: What caused you to believe something was amiss?

  Morehouse: She carried too little sail so I bore up up towards her. About fifteen minutes later I saw the vessel yawing and noticed what I thought was a flag of distress flying at her yard.

  Flood: A flag of distress! Was this indeed so?

  Morehouse: No, it was a flapping sail. We came three or four hundred yards off at about 3 p.m. that day. We hailed her but received no answer, and saw no one on the decks.

  Flood: Did you choose the men to investigate the Mary Celeste?

  Morehouse: I believe I did.

  Flood: Don’t you know? After all, you are the Captain. The one who issues the commands and orders.

  Morehouse: Yes, I chose the men.

  Flood: In that case, as there was a distinct need to communicate both ways accurately and effectively, why did you send a man who didn’t speak English properly?

  Morehouse: There were men aboard the other ship who were German and were not good at English. Johnson could communicate with them.

  Flood: But he is Russian!

  Morehouse: He can speak some German.

  Flood: This Honourable Court may believe you but I find that hard to accept. Very hard indeed! When did you first recognise that the other vessel was the Mary Celeste?

  Morehouse: When we were about a mile off.

  Flood: Did you say anything about her to the crew?

  Morehouse: Such as what?

  Flood: Such as “My God, it’s the Mary Celeste” or ‘That looks like Captain Briggs’ ship”.

  Morehouse: No, I don’t think so.

  Flood: It took you two hours to reach her. Were you too concerned during that period even to confide at all in your crew?

  Morehouse: It wasn’t like that at all.

  Flood: Were you expecting to find the Mary Celeste at that point?

  Morehouse: No.

  Flood: Then why did you not mention the fact that you recognised her to your crew?

  Morehouse: I cannot answer that question.

  Flood: Cannot or will not, Captain Morehouse? Is it true that you delegated the decision to take the Mary Celeste as salvage to your crew?

  Morehouse: Yes.

  Flood: How long have you been a Captain?

  Morehouse: Many years.

  Flood: How many times before have you delegated a decision of such importance to your crew?

  Morehouse: An incident such as this has never before arisen.

  Flood: And you left this decision to a crew you hardly know; many of whom have never sailed with you before or may never sail with you again.

  Morehouse: It was their lives at risk.

  Flood: And the owner’s cargo as well. I wonder how he views a situation where the Captain left important decisions to the crew. You knew they would take in the Mary Celeste, didn’t you?

  Morehouse: I wasn’t certain.

  Flood: Captain Morehouse! Did you believe the crew would give up the prize money of a salvage?

  Morehouse: That was not my concern at the time.

  Flood: I’m sure it wasn’t. In fact I am certain it wasn’t! What scheme had you arranged with Captain Briggs? You knew he would wait for you at that spot. You were looking out for him and found him. What next?

  Pisani could take no more of this kind of bullying and raised his objection vehemently. Sir James took sympathy with him and cautioned Solly Flood to say:

  “I understand the frustrations with regard to finding an adequate solution to this enigma, but Captain Morehouse ought not to be bullied on matters which may equally concern him.”

  Solly Flood apologised briefly, almost contemptuously, and continued questioning the Captain.

  Flood: Why did you allow Deveau to choose his own men to go aboard the Mary Celeste for the second time?

  Morehouse: I don’t know that he did choose them.

  Flood: He told this Honourable Court that he did.

  Morehouse: I am not aware of the facts of that matter.

  Flood: Are you not certain whether he gave such orders or whether you did?

  Morehouse: After it was decided to take her in, arrangements were made to obtain equipment missing from the other ship. It really was a busy time.

  Flood: And you do not recall whether he chose the men or not?

  Morehouse: I concurred that the division of the crew was the best available, and it was therefore the argument is academic.

  Flood: It is not for you to say whether any argument in academic in this Honourable Court, Captain!

  Solly Flood sat down and left Sir James Cochrane to end the session. After some general questions, the Captain’s view was requested.

  Sir James: With your experience, what is your opinion on this mystery, Captain.

  Morehouse: I believe she was becalmed a few miles to the north of the dangerous coast of Santa Maria in the Azores. The current began to drive her towards the shore and the crew took quickly to the boat. They probably intended to stand by and would rejoin the ship if a breeze sprang up but didn’t take the precaution of attaching the yawl by a line to her. I think that the Celeste drifted away and the boat was smashed to pieces on the surf at the foot of the cliffs. All those in the boat would have perished.

  Sir James: Don’t you think it hard to believe that an experienced man, such as Captain Briggs, would have failed to secure the boat by a line?

  Morehouse: I do.

  Sir James: Then it is not much of a solution, is it?

  Morehouse: It’s the only one I can offer.

  The Judge decided to adjourn at that point to consider the evidence. There was a lot to think about and little to show for it. From his point of view, it would for ever remain a mystery unless word arrived from a survivor, wherever he, or she, might be found.

  The Follow-Through

  On the same day the special survey was carried out on the Mary Celeste, the Dei Gratia sailed smoothly away from Gibraltar to deliver her cargo of petroleum to Genoa. It was a twenty-four day journey and was scheduled to arrive there on the sixteenth of January, 1873. One could say it was a minor event....except for one particular important feature. The vessel sailed under the command of Oliver Deveau and not Captain Morehouse, who remained at Gibraltar. When the Queen’s Proctor received the news, his suspicions were fully aroused although he was unable to make any specific allegations. Nonetheless, it gave him something on which to chew harder. He considered the opinions of John Austin and the diver, Portunato, very carefully and decided that he was still unsatisfied. There was something more which would offer him further clues.....if only he could think of it! After Christmas had passed, he ordered a further examination of the vessel to endeavour to find those clues. On the seventh of January, 1873, he went aboard once more. This time he was in the company of four experienced Captains in the Royal Navy, and a Colonel serving with the Royal Engineers. Fifteen days later, on the twenty-second of January, he wrote to the Marine Department of the Board of Trade in London outlining his actions and briefly identifying his findings. This was a communication in which Solly Flood intended to express his views and suspicions to the full.

  Gibraltar, 22nd Jan’y 1873

  “Sir,

  I have the honour to acquaint you, for the information of the Committee of the Privy Council for Trade, that early on th
e morning of the 13th Dec. part of the crew of the Brit. Vessel Dei Gratia found fr: New York to Gibraltar for orders brought into this port a brigantine wh: they stated they had found on the 5th of the month in latitude 38.20 N. Longitude 17.15 W. 3 p.m. sea time totally have the honour to acquaint you, for the totally abandoned and derelict and which they supposed from the log to be the American brigantine Mary Celeste bound fr: New York to Genoa. They stated that the wind being from the north and the Dei Gratia consequently on the Port tack they met the derelict with her jib and foremast staysail set on the Starboard tack. I caused the derelict to be arrested in the customary manner upon her arrival whereupon the Master of the Dei Gratia which had arrived on the evening of the 12th November (this was an error: he intended to write December) made his claim for salvage. The Second Mate of the Dei Gratia and those of her Crew who had boarded the derelict were examined in support of the claim to salvage on the 20th and 21s ultimo. But the account which they gave of the soundness and good condition of the derelict was so extraordinary that I found it necessary to apply for a survey wh: was held in my presence on the 23rd of the same month and the result of which is embodied in the affidavit of Mr. Ricardo Portunato, a diver sworn on the 7th inst; of Mr. John Austin, Surveyor of shipping, sworn on the 8th inst; and Mr. F.I. Vecchio (should be T.J. Vecchio) sworn on the 9thscabb inst. From the survey it appears that both bows of the derelict had been recently cut by a sharp instrument but that she was thoroughly sound staunch strong and every way seaworthy and well found, that she was well provisioned and that she had encountered no seriously heavy weather and that no appearance of fire or of explosion or of alarm of fire or of explosion or any other assignable cause for abandonment was discoverable. A Sword, however, was found wh; appeared to me to exhibit traces of blood and to have been wiped before being returned into the scabbard.

  My opinion in this respect having been corroborated by others I Proceeded on the 7th inst. to make with the assistance of the Marshal of the Vice-Admiralty Court a still more minute examination for marks of violence, and had the honor of being accompanied and greatly assisted by Capt. Fitzroy, R.N., H.M.S. Minotaur; Capt. Adeane, R.N., H.M.S. Agincourt; Capt. Dowell, C.B.,R.N., H.M.S. Hercules; Capt. Vansittart R.N., H.M.S. Sultan, and by Col. Laffan, R.E., all of whom agreed with me in opinion that the injury to the bows had been effected intentionally by a sharp instrument. On examining the Starboard top gallant rail marks were discovered apparently of blood and a mark of a blow apparently of a sharp axe. On descending through the forehatch a barrel ostensibly of Alcohol appeared to have been tampered with. The Vessel’s Register Manifest and Bills of lading have not been found neither has any sextant or Chronometer been found. On the other hand almost the whole personal effects of the Master and so I believe of his wife and child and of the Crew have been found in good order and condition. They are of considerable value. In the Capt’s Cabin were a Harmonium in a Rosewood case books of music and others mostly of a religious tendency. Gold, Trinkets and jewellery, and female attire of a superior description were in the lady’s boxes. The working Chart and ships log were also found on the arrest of the Vessel both are comp- lete up to noon of the 24th of Novbr. I transmit a copy of the last day’s work and the deck or slate log is continued, a copy of wh. is enclosed up to 8 a.m. on the following day at wh. hour the eastern point of St. Mary’s (Azores) bore S.S.W distant 6 miles - she had therefore run considerably less number of knots since the previous noon than that entered in the Slate, the Longitude of St. Mary’s being 25.9 W. Since then eight weeks have elapsed and nothing whatsoever has been heard of the Master or Crew or of the unhappy Lady and Child.