'After some further evidence of the same general character, in the
course of which nothing new was elicited, the jury late the same
evening found a verdict to the effect that the wreck of the "Royal
Charter" was caused by purely accidental circumstances; that Captain
Taylor was perfectly sober; and that he did all in his power to save
the vessel and the lives of the passengers.'
Who doubted that Captain Taylor did all he could to save the vessel
after she struck upon the rocks? That was only one question out of
several that should have been considered. The construction of the
ship, the 'hugging of the coast,' looking for a pilot in such
tempestuous weather, the delay (if any delay there were) in cutting
down the masts--these were the lines of inquiry to which the coroner
and jury should have directed their special attention, and followed to
their just terminations. But the investigation was feebly conducted
throughout, and is not likely to rest at its present unsatisfactory
point. The Press will not be silent upon the matter. While no one
desires a different verdict, the public at large has a right to expect
that the evidence upon which any verdict in such a case as this is
founded should be of the completest character. Every calamity has its
lesson; and if that lesson is not learnt at once, depend upon it the
calamity will be repeated until it is. But what lesson is it possible
to learn from such an 'investigation' as that which has just concluded
at Bangor?[F]
[F] The _Times_ of this day (8th of Nov.) states that a
government inquiry into the causes of the catastrophe is
immediately to take place.