by P.C.s C. BIELBY and H. H. EDSON,
HULL DOCKS
Between 1952 and January 1968, fourteen Hull fishing vessels have been lost whilst at sea. In five of these incidents all the crews were saved, the other nine involved a loss of 3 lives. The Hull public, although horror stricken in the past, have always treated these tragedies as part of the hazards of the fishing industry.
Readers of this article will recall the latest disaster to hit the community. To re-cap, at the end of January 1968, the trawlers St. Romanus and the Kingston Peridot were both reported missing. The trawlers had been fishing in extreme arctic conditions, and no news had been received from them for several days. Midway between these losses and the end of this story, a third trawler, the Ross Cleveland, went down in treacherous seas off the north coast of Iceland. From these three trawlers 58 men were lost, leaving 28 widows and 66 fatherless children.
Contrary to former practice, the womenfolk of the fishing community in the west of Hull suddenly took it into their heads to raise an outcry of what they alleged were appalling safety conditions on board fishing vessels. Feeling grew strong among these women, and their anger was directed towards the trawler owners.
On the afternoon of Friday, 2nd February 1968, the St. Romanus was officially declared “missing, presumed lost, with all hands”. By coincidence, the women had arranged a meeting in a local hall to form a committee whose intention it was to try to improve the safety conditions aboard trawlers. The news of the “official loss” of the missing vessel added fuel to the fire.
It was pretty obvious to the Hull Docks Division of the British Transport Police that these women would try to contact the owners at their premises on St. Andrew’s Dock. Officers took up a position at the Billingsgate Crossing, which is the main entrance to the Dock. Wireless cars were placed at strategic positions between the meeting place and the Dock entrance.
About 4 p.m. that day, a Detective Constable reported that it was the intention of the women to march en masse to St. Andrew’s Dock and demand a meeting with the trawler owners, especially Hellyer Bros. Ltd. (Kingston Peridot) and Hamlyn Ltd. (St. Romanus).
It will be readily appreciated by all Police Officers the great difficulty that faced them. It is a far different cry from dealing with striking males when one is faced with inflamed and chanting females.
Contact was made with the Hull Fishing Vessel Owners’ Association, a representative body of the trawler owners, to see if they would receive a deputation of the women, rather than allow a whole hoard on to the Dock Estate. Three representatives of the Owners’ Association were designated this unenviable task. Permission for this meeting to take place on the Dock Estate was obtained.
Armed with this appeasement, Police Officers took up a position at the Dock Entrance. After a short time, a crowd of women, accompanied by children, and estimated to be in the region of 400, noisily approached the Billingsgate entrance. Lesser men would have been excused from facing this formidable and angry body. However, in the true traditions of the Police Service, our officers stopped the column as it was about to enter the Dock Estate.
They were told of the arrangements previously made. The women agreed and appointed three women, Mrs. Lillian Bilocca (the now famous “Big Lil”), Mrs. Rose Cooper and Mrs. Mavis Wilkinson, to act as spokeswomen. They were escorted to the prearranged meeting-place, and it was also decided to allow three trawlermen to attend.
About 4.30 p.m. the delegation met the owners’ representatives. The escorting party of Police Officers were invited to stay at the meeting. By this time the remainder of the crowd of women had taken up a position on the foreshore of the River Humber—a public right-of-way—and unfortunately outside of the building in which the meeting was taking place.
The meeting, which lasted 50 minutes, was extremely lively, as can be imagined. Although the owners’ representatives answered fairly the questions put to them by the delegation, the outcome was unsatisfactory to the three women who insisted on meeting the owners of two of the missing vessels. These owners refused to meet the deputation at that particular time, as no useful purpose could be served.
Our Police were now faced with the tricky situation of the three women going down to the milling crowd on the Humber foreshore and telling them of the owners’ decision. The crowd of women, some with young children, already irate, would have been incensed, to say the least, and there was a strong possibility of someone falling into the swirling and dangerous waters of the River Humber.
It was suggested that the three females be taken out of the back entrance of the building, and clear of the Dock Estate, before imparting the news to the waiting crowd. The three women were persuaded to agree to this proposal and through this piece of diplomacy the whole crowd of women were led safely from the St. Andrew’s Dock without incident.
When off the Dock Estate, “Big Lil” told the crowd of the owners’ decision. The women became extremely angry, gathering round her and shouting slogans against the owners. The foresight shown by the Police was therefore proved, for had this angry scene taken place on the narrow foreshore, events would have proved extremely dangerous.
Before dispersing, Mrs. Bilocca and her two “aides” decided on their further plans of action. They were to arrange a meeting in London the following Tuesday to lobby the Ministers of State responsible for the fishing industry. In the meantime, they would visit the St. Andrew’s Dock on each tide to prevent any trawler, which was not fully manned, from sailing, stressing tha t the crew must carry a fully competent wireless operator. They further said it was their intention to board any such vessel, not fully manned, prior to it sailing. They were to carry out these threats until the owners of the two missing vessels decided to meet them.
It was impossible to anticipate how many women would assist “Big Lil” in her venture at these sailings. Arrangements were made to augment the St. Andrew’s Dock Police Officers at each tide.
The morning tide the next day was about 10 a.m. and from 6.30 a.m. onwards Police Officers on foot and in vehicles fitted with radio were placed at strategic positions on the Dock, ready to face any eventuality. Fortunately, on this morning the weather took a hand, it being extremely cold with snow showers, and “Big Lil” and Mrs. Cooper were the only two women to attend. They arrived on the Dock at 7 a.m. They were met and politely told that the only place they could stand was on the public right-of-way near to the Lockhead. Both women agreed to register their protest from this point. About an hour later they were joined by Mrs. Hilda Pye, whose first husband had been lost at sea, and whose second husband was a member of the missing St. Romanus.
The tide commenced about 9 a.m. in bitterly cold weather. Mrs. Bilocca and her two companions, accompanied by pressmen, took up their positions at the Lockhead. A number of trawlers were due to sail, and four of them sailed without incident. As each one passed through the Lock entrance, “Big Lil” shouted, “Are you fully manned, lads, and have you a wireless operator on board?” The fishermen of Hull are notoriously re tic e n t; each of these crews answering “Big Lil” with a quiet “Aye, lass”.
The fifth trawler, the St. Kerverne, a sister ship of the ill-fated St. Romanus, came through the Lock about 10.20 a.m. “Big Lil” again asked her question of the crew. This time the crew answered, “No, luv, we’ve no wireless operator on board!” At this, Mrs. Pye became hysterical and had to be gently restrained by Police Officers. A Policewoman of the Hull Docks Division had been instructed to keep an eagle eye on Mrs. Bilocca. “Big Lil” (whose nickname is derived from her bulk of 17 stones) made an effort to jump on board the vessel, shouting, “Don’t go without a radio operator, lads, don’t go . . . don’t go. . . .” The Policewoman who is a slight figure compared with “Big Lil” , made a valiant attempt to prevent Lil from jumping. However, it took another three or four officers to restrain and hold her until the ship had got through the Lock.
“Big Lil” then achieved her first measure of success, the St. Kerverne later returning to the Dock to await the arrival of a radio operator.
On the Sunday morning tide, “Big Lil” again attended and was satisfied that the only trawler to sail was fully manned. On Monday, 5th February, Lil, accompanied by other members of her committee, followed up her success by meeting the owners of the two missing vessels. During the talks with the owners, news of the loss of a third Hull trawler, the Ross Cleveland , was just coming through to Hull. One of the members of Lil’s committee, Mrs. Christine Smallbone, had to withdraw owing to the fact tha t her brother was the skipper of this vessel.
“Big Lil’s” meeting with the trawler owners had a greater success than even she must have anticipated. One of the owners, anticipated measures soon to be announced by Her Majesty’s Government by telling Mrs. Bilocca th a t all his vessels would be banned from the north coast of Iceland during extreme bad weather.
A point of interest to our readers is that “Big Lil” and her committee went to the Houses of Parliament on the 50th anniversary of the Royal Assent being given to the Representation of the People Act (the right for women to vote and stand for Parliament).
Most of you are now fully aware of Lil’s meeting with Mr. J. P. W. Mallalieu, Minister of State, Board of Trade, and Mr. F. Peart, Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries, and her outstanding success in her endeavours to improve the safety of the fishermen of England.
A deep-sea fisherman’s occupation is about the most hazardous of all work that one can encounter. Statistics show that each of these men has two-and-a-half times more chance of losing his life at sea than a coal miner working in the pit — a worthy comparison. Anything that can be done to alleviate this danger is surely welcome.
THE INQUIRY
On 9th October 1968, the Official Inquiry into the loss of the three Hull trawlers, St. Romanus, Ross Cleveland and Kingston Peridot opened at the City Hall, Hull. For 18 days Mr. John Naisby, Q.C., the Wreck Commissioner, sitting with Mr. R. A. Beattie, a nautical surveyor, and Skipper W. F. Wright as assessors, heard evidence and theories from over 120 witnesses.
The first inquiry was into the loss of the St. Romanus. The trawler left Hull on 10th January, and as far as her home port was concerned nothing was heard of her again. An Icelandic trawler mate told the court that on 11th January, he had heard a May-day call from the St. Romanus over his ship’s radio, except that he reported the matter to his Skipper nothing else was done until 14 days later, when news was received that the St. Romanus was presumed lost. On 13th January, an inflatable life-raft with the ship’s serial number was picked up 265 miles north of Spurn.
The owning Company’s manager, in evidence, agreed that he should have taken action earlier than 20th January, when he had received no report from the ship. The agreed procedure was that ships would report daily. He did not report to his principals of the St. Romanus’ not wirelessing into port until 22nd January — 12 days after the ship sailed.
A former Skipper of the ship put forward a theory that she may have hit a mine, which had been reported in the area roughly where the St. R om a n u s would have been 24 hours after leaving Hull.
A Telegraphic Inspector gave evidence that the trawler had wireless equipment which was better than that legally required. Radio range, depending on the time of day and position of the ship, could be expected to reach 1,000 miles on high frequency and 150 miles on medium frequency.
Meteorological experts said that weather in the area where the ship would be on the 11th was not really bad. There may have been snow showers, and these would cut visibility to 500 yards.
An Oceanographer, in a sworn statement, said that waves at that time of the year would be of an average of 15 ft. but could reach 30 ft.
Mrs. Lillian Bilocca—”Big Lil”—attended each day of the hearing and asked to address the court in this first inquiry, but after discussions with Dr. Lionel Rosen, representing the Transport and General Workers Union, and some of the relatives, she decided not to pursue her request.
In his closing speech to the court, Mr. Barry Sheen, Q.C., Treasury Solicitor, conducting the Board of Trade’s case, listed 22 questions which he asked the Court to answer in an effort to find a possible reason why the trawler was lost. He invited the Court to decide that a search was not instituted promptly enough, and to name any person or persons at fault for this.
The Second Inquiry, into the loss of the Ross Cleveland, opened with the dramatic evidence of the sole survivor of the disaster, Mr. Harry Eddom. He described the hours before the Cleveland sank on 4th February.
He said the crew used axes and battens to get the ice off the ship’s sides and were kicking the ice off the warp-wires. They were kept busy all day, and as fast as they cleared it more ice formed. During the afternoon the wind was Force 8 or 9 and it was snowing hard, his Skipper, Phil Gay, decided to stow the fishing gear and dodge into shelter, at this time they were about 33 miles from the coast of Iceland.
Later that day the wind had got up to a Force 12 hurricane and ice on the bridge windows and superstructure on the weather side of the ship was between three and four inches thick.
As the Skipper tried to turn the ship into the wind, it just turned over. Mr. Eddom was thrown into the icy waters and was later dragged into a life-raft by the Bosun and another crew member. Both these men died from exposure overnight.
Another Skipper sailing in the same area at the same time gave evidence that “the ice, which collected, was the worst I’ve ever seen”. This Skipper, Mr. Len Whur, was the last to “see” the Cleveland, he watched on his radar screen, only a quarter of a mile away, as he heard his friend, Phil Gay, appeal over the radio, “Help us, Len, she’s going”. Mr. Whur could do nothing because to go to the Cleveland’s aid would have endangered his own ship and he just had to stand and watch his friend’s trawler vanish from the radar screen.
Mr. Hlynur Sigtryggsson, of the Icelandic Meteorological Office, described the weather on 4th February as “Storm of hurricane force with 13 degrees of frost, snow falling, the wind was over Force 12 accompanied by very heavy seas and spray”. He added that the storm, the worst he had seen since 1925, lasted 15 hours and was almost unique for three decades.
Another expert described the stability of the Cleveland. If she suffered a severe list of 55 to 60 degrees she would be in a position where, if the wind continued, she would be unable to get back. In that position the ventilators would be starting to go under water, the funnel would be taking the sea and the fish in the hold would be likely to move.
In concluding the case for the Board of Trade, Mr. Sheen, Q.C., invited the Court to find that the loss of the trawler was not caused, or contributed to, by the wrongful act of any person or persons. The main thing was to try to find an answer to how to stop trawlers icing up. Electric element heating of the surface and hot water lances were two of the suggestions mentioned.
Dr. Lionel Rosen, again for the T.G.W.U. and some of the relatives, criticised the Board of Trade for allowing so much time to elapse between the loss of the Hull trawlers Lorella and Roderigo 13 years ago (they both capsized with ice) and the present tragedies before acting on the clearing of ice problem. He submitted that the time had come for legislation to be introduced regarding the safety regulations on trawlers.
Less than 20 tons of ice on her superstructure would have been sufficient to give the Kingston Peridot only a very slender chance of survival in a storm, was one of the theories put forward in the third loss.
On 25th January the Peridot reported to her owners that fishing was slack on the North Cape of Iceland area and that she was steaming eastwards. The next day, the Skipper, Ray Wilson, spoke with the Skipper of the Kingston Sardius over the radio telephone and told him he was on the north-east corner of Skaggarum and was stowing his fishing gear and steaming eastwards towards the Sardius. It was arranged to contact again a t 21.30 hours the next day (27th). No further signals were heard from the Peridot.
Evidence of the weather conditions on 26th January — Force 12 hurricane winds, snow and freezing temperatures — was given to the Court.
One theory put forward was that the trawler may have hit a small iceberg, but the vast amount of oil washed up along 70 miles of the Icelandic coast suggested that the trawler may have been ripped open on the rocks. The oil, which affected seabirds, was the first sign of the disaster which overtook the trawler when she failed to keep a radio rendezvous with her sister ship.
On 29th January, the day the oil was first sighted, a life-raft bearing the name, Kingston Peridot was found near Kopasker. Extensive searches for survivors were made but without success. Later the same day three buoys, plus oil and wreckage, were found at Axafjord.
A joint managing-director of the owners said in his opinion the ship had not capsized, because her stability was adequate; she had been in similar conditions many times before and he felt if icing-up was takin g place, a message would have been sent out, and no such message had been received.
In his final summing-up, Mr. Sheen, Q.C., asked the Court to make five recommendations when giving their findings. They were
(a) All Trawler Owners should with professional assistance examine the stability of all of the older vessels;
(b) All Owners and the Industry should pursue methods of removing ice from trawlers;
(c) Mention the wisdom of restricting areas where fishing took place in vessels of doubtful stability;
(d) Re-emphasise the needs to impress on Skippers the dangers of icing;
(e) Improved communications between ships and shore.
On Monday, 4th November 1968, exactly nine months after “Big Lil” and the women of Hull held their original meeting in the Victoria Hall, Mr. John Naisby, Q.C., announced the findings of the Court of Inquiry.
In the case of the St. Romanus, it was not possible to ascertain the cause of her loss. In all probability the ship was lost some time on 11th January in a position not far from where her life-raft was found. Mr. Naisby made point that the owners had a system whereby their ships were to report their position daily and added, “In the opinion of the Court, it is no good having a system for the reporting of trawlers unless that system is, in fact, carried out and supervised. There was undue delay in appreciating that something might have happened to the St. Romanus, and in the opinion of the Court it was time to think seriously on the 12th of the possibility of a casualty”.
In fairness to the owners, the Court made comment that the weather was by no means exceptional on the 11th and 12th and there was no reason to suppose that had action been taken on the 12th anything could have been done to save the ship or the lives of those on board.
There was no excuse for the delay in identification of the life-raft, but the Court noted that as an interim measure all life-rafts in the Hull fleet were now marked “Hull, England”.
In giving the Court’s findings on the other two vessels, the Ross Cleveland and Kingston Peridot, Mr. Naisby stated that both were seaworthy in all respects for normal voyages but coupled with circumstances of hurricane winds with icing conditions and a prolonged period of heavy ice formation both lost stability and capsized. He said, “It is indeed fortunate that more vessels were not lost”. But in the opinion of the Court, these losses clearly demonstrated the needs for an investigation into the stability of trawlers in arctic waters.
An international committee, I.M.C.O., had recommended certain standards of stability. These recommendations included icing conditions which both the Cleveland and Peridot had experienced, and this emphasised that Governments may consider a higher standard for their vessels.
This article originally appeared in the BTP Journal No. 83, Spring 1969.