The Times, Friday, Feb 02, 1866; pg. 5; Issue 25411; col A THE LOSS OF THE LONDON. ----------------------- OFFICIAL INQUIRY. [continued] Mr. Isaac COLE, stevedore, was then examined as to the shipping of the cargo of the London, which he had inspected under the superintendence of Mr. Charles WIGRAM previously to her last voyage. He did not know what quantity of coals was put in; but he did know the quantity of her dead weight, which consisted of iron bars and sheet and bundle iron. The dead weight was 345 tons. It was stowed in the after-part of the main hatchway and in the after-part of the fore hatchway, leaving a space at the sides of about 4ft. That was a proper part of the ship to stow the iron. It was all stowed in grating fashion, or cross-ways. It occupied a space of about 56ft. in length, about 24ft. in breadth, and about 5ft. in depth. The iron was the principal dead weight in the cargo. There were some agricultural implements in casks, but these were not, he thought, received as "dead weight," but by measurement. He was not sure of this. There also were some cases and bales of goods amounting to 963 tons measurement. He did not know whether this included the agricultural implements or not. He took it that on an average about 35 tons weight to 100 tons measurement would be the cargo of the London. He put the "kentledge" (the ballast of the ship) on board the London on her first voyage. It was 200 tons; it was iron kentledge. The measurement goods were stowed over the iron in the main hold and in the after hold. None of the cargo was stowed on deck. He weighed the ship's provisions and water. The provisions were about 120 tons weight. He did not know the weight or the quantity of the water. He had no memorandum on the subject. The greater part of the passengers' baggage was stowed away while the vessel was in the East India Dock. That which was not required on the voyage was stowed in the fore hold. The passengers' baggage occupied about 50 tons space of room. He superintended the stowage of the London's cargoes on all her voyages. She carried as much cargo on her former voyages as on her last one. On her first voyage she had 189½ tons of dead weight (iron) and 773 tons measurement. He could not give the weight and measurement tonnage separately for the second voyage, but the total was 1,347 tons. On the third and last voyage the total was 1,308 tons. Mr. TRAILL. - Had you a larger or smaller proportion of dead weight on the second voyage than on the third? Mr. COLE. - About the same. Captain BAKER. - You had a larger tonnage on the second than on the third voyage? Mr. COLE. - Yes, we had. By Captain HARRIS. - The kentledge was stowed, 150 tons down the main hold, from the after part of the main hatchway to within about 20ft. of the after part of the fore hatchway, and the rest in the after hold from the fore part of the after hatchway to the tank-room, which he should think was about from 15ft. to 20 ft. There was none in the midship body. The tanks were on either side of the screw alley, run close up to the deck. The iron in the main hold was stowed on billet wood. When the measurement goods were put in the hold was filled chock up to the beam. That was the case in both the fore and the after hold, but there was no iron in the after hold, except the kentledge. Wet provisions were stowed in that hold. Measurement goods, passengers' baggage, and dry provisions for the home voyage were stowed in the fore hold. There were 15 tons of coals in the fore peak; there was no hanging platform there. It was his duty to take in her spars. She had a spare topmast, topsail yard, jibboom, flying jibboom, and two or three spare topgallantmasts. The topsail and topsail yard were stowed on deck, and the other spars on top of "the house." The latter were lashed to ringbolts. By Captain BAKER. - She had topgallantmasts and royalmasts on one spar fore and aft. The flying jibboom was distinct from the jibboom. The tanks were not up to the upper deck, but to an orlop deck laid over the screw tunnel. In his opinion none of the cargo or spars would have been likely to "fetch way" (break adrift) in bad weather. By Mr. O'DOWD. - There was a second officer down in the hold, but he never interfered with witness in respect of the stowage. One of the owners, Mr. Charles WIGRAM, was on board every day; and, as far as the dead weight was concerned, he would have directed witness in regard to the stowage. Mr. Henry CAULIER, Principal of the Searchers' Department in the Long Room of the Custom-house, was then examined. He said his department had to do with the shipping bills of foreign-going ships. A shipping bill was an entry outwards of goods to be exported, declaring their value, quantity, and quality, and was prepared by the exporter. In respect to British and foreign free goods, it had to be prepared in conformity with an official form. It was certified by the Controller of Accounts. Assuming that the shipping bills gave a correct description of the goods, they contained a very minute account of the ship's cargo. The accuracy of the contents of the bill was checked by the manifest of the broker. This was a list of all the goods, but did not give the contents of each package. It was not possible to obtain a more accurate description of a ship's cargo than that given by the shipping bills. He had made an analysis of the bills of the London. The manifest was sent in by the broker on the 4th of January. The dead weight, such as iron plates and bars, sheet-iron, lead and shot, stone blocks, iron, nails, and screws, was declared to weigh 347 tons 4cwt. 39qrs. and 18lb. Then there was other weight, such as hardware, agricultural implements, and a similar description of goods, amounting to 13 tons 19cwt. 3qrs. and 4lb. He did not think this could fairly be called "dead weight," because it was enclosed in cases. He could not give the weight of the other portions of the cargo. There was a vast quantity of millinery, haberdashery, woollen goods, flannels, cotton slops, glass, and such other articles as usually were carried by ships going to Melbourne. The total declared value of the cargo was 124,785L. 17s. 4d. That was irrespective of the bonded goods, of which the Custom-house had not the value. There were very few of these - cigars probably formed the principal portion of them. From 100L. to 200L. would, he thought, be about their value. Mr. COLE, having been recalled, said after everything had been put aboard the London he saw her draught of water in the dock. It was 20ft. forward and 20ft. 9in. aft. By Captain HARRIS. - There were three heights of kentledge in the main body and two heights in the after hold. Mr. O'DOWD said this disposed of all the evidence he had to adduce in reference to the cargo and the stowage. The next branch of the case was the management of the ship on the passage from London to Plymouth, and the first witness with reference to this matter would be the pilot. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This article to be continued with the examination of the pilot..... Petra.