Mr. Isaacs, at great length, read over portions of the evidence given before Mr. Justice Williams during the previous trial, and concluded by strongly urging that a new trial should be granted on the grounds, first of misdirection by the judge; and second, of the jury’s verdict being given against the weight of evidence.
Mr. Smyth, Mr. Box, and Mr. Williams, also at great length, read over portions of the evidence, and contended that the judge’s direction to the jury was a fair one, and the jury’s verdict a just one which should not be disturbed.
During the course of arguing the various items, the Chief Justice pointed out that “the effect of a second mast on the Alert would have been to weigh the stern of the vessel down still more than it was down.”
Mr. Smyth: It would have assisted in getting the vessel up to the wind.
Chief Justice Madden: I cannot see how much better off the vessel would be had there been another mast, except that with a sail on it, perhaps the steamer might have been steadied.
Mr. Justice Hood: No doubt had there been another mast, persons would have come forward and said that was the cause of the disaster.
Chief Justice Madden: When persons are in misfortune, generous people come forward and find ingenious reasons. The first thing a captain would do, if there were a second mast with a sail up, would probably be to strip it off like a shot.
Mr. Smyth: Many of the numerous experts were of opinion that a sail aft would have been not only useful, but actually necessary.
Chief Justice Madden: These witnesses wished, in a generous impulse, to make the best argument they could. The generous impulses which were usually exhibited were attachable in an enlarged degree to sailors. I think the man would be a wicked one who, knowing the unsea-worthy condition of a vessel, did not report it to the proper authorities.
Mr. Justice Hood: What do you say that the owners ought to have done that they did not do?