The Dutch newspaper Het Nieuws van den dag: kleine courant daily edition 8 March 1911 published an item dealing with the meeting of the Marine Council and the fate of the Richelieu. In January 1911 was the Dutch tug Roode Zee master Koenes of the Smit&Co.’s Sleepdienst of Rotterdam ordered to tow the former French warship Richelieu from Toulon towards Hendrik-Ido-Ambacht where she was to be broken up. She was prepared for the voyage 12 January and the 9 runners on board were equipped with life jackets, a work boat and 30 fathom anchor chain. Cape Finisterre was passed 28 January but the weather became worse and worse ending in a storm 30 January. The tow chain broke 31 January around 140 miles west of Oeussant but the Roode Zee stayed near by the Richelieu where on board everything was well.
The photo below was published in the Dutch magazine De Prins of 1911
The Roode Zee went towards Corcubion lacking coal not able to take the Richelieu again on tow due to the weather conditions and left her behind. When returning to a guessed position where the Richelieu should be the latter couldn’t be found. Later was discovered that she hadn’t a red lantern on board. The tug Zwarte Zee of the same company went searching for the Richelieu found her later back without the runners who were picked up b the Artist. The Roode Zee in the meantime searched for some days before entering Plymouth and was from there ordered to return to Rotterdam. In the meeting of the Marine Council master Koenes was blamed for what happened. He was responsible for the runners and their equipment. C. Verschoor who had been the chief runner was an experienced runner and brought for instance a dredger and a dry dock without problems over the ocean. Ike most of the other runners he was he an employee of Smit&Co. with the same salary as the others. Being chief runner doesn’t mean anything except that he should start with the work. Two runners were paid by Mr. Tiedeman of Hendrik-Ido-Ambacht. Verschoor said that the Richelieu wasn’t proper prepared for the voyage but as he signed a contract he did his work and didn’t go the Dutch consul fearing that if he complained he didn’t get any work in the future. The equipage master of the company had told him that everything they needed was on board. There was however none reserve lanterns or red lights. He left the Richelieu with the other runners lacking everything as victuals, mineral oil and lanterns. The runners in service of Tiedeman were fitted out by the latter but refused to shore victuals. Verschoor quitted with being a runner because it was too dangerous work for which wasn’t paid enough for. Master Koenes claimed for the Marine Council that before he left towards Toulon not to be informed in anyway about the ship, he even didn’t know her name. The Marine Council declared the same month that the runners had done well by leaving the ship lacking sufficient equipment and that one tug was not enough but that that at least two tugs had to be available for towing. Koenes had one everything to prepare the ship for the voyage. The Government was responsible for new regulations dealing with the fact that masters of tugs were responsible for the ships they had to tow. (2)
Notes
1. A central battery ship of the by Henri Dupuy de Lôme improved L'Océan-class ordered 1869, laid down 1 December 1869, launched at the shipyard at Toulon, France, launched 3 December 1873, completed 312 April 1875, decommissioned 5 March 1900 and sold to be broken up in 1911. With a displacement of 8,984 metric tons and 8,842 long tons and as dimensions 101,7 x 17,4 x 8,5 meter. Her two 3-cylinder Indret steam engines and 8 boilers supplied 4,600 ihp allowing with the two screws a speed of 12 knots. With a speed of 10 knots she had a range of 3,300 nautical miles. The Richelieu was a combination between a sailing ship and a steamship and was thereby also square rigged. Her crew numbered 750 men. Original armament consisted of 6x1-274mm (10.8”) guns, 5x1-240mm (9.4”) guns, 10x1-120mm (4.7”) guns and off course a plough-shaped ram with an outer length of 3m! The 120mm guns were later replaced by 6-138mm (5.4”) guns. The armour consisted of a 220mm (8.7”) belt, 160mm (6.3”) battery, 100mm (3.9”0 bulkheads and a 10mm(0.4”) deck , strangely were the barbettes not armoured.
2. See for this voyage also other Dutch newspapers.
The photo below was published in the Dutch magazine De Prins of 1911
The Roode Zee went towards Corcubion lacking coal not able to take the Richelieu again on tow due to the weather conditions and left her behind. When returning to a guessed position where the Richelieu should be the latter couldn’t be found. Later was discovered that she hadn’t a red lantern on board. The tug Zwarte Zee of the same company went searching for the Richelieu found her later back without the runners who were picked up b the Artist. The Roode Zee in the meantime searched for some days before entering Plymouth and was from there ordered to return to Rotterdam. In the meeting of the Marine Council master Koenes was blamed for what happened. He was responsible for the runners and their equipment. C. Verschoor who had been the chief runner was an experienced runner and brought for instance a dredger and a dry dock without problems over the ocean. Ike most of the other runners he was he an employee of Smit&Co. with the same salary as the others. Being chief runner doesn’t mean anything except that he should start with the work. Two runners were paid by Mr. Tiedeman of Hendrik-Ido-Ambacht. Verschoor said that the Richelieu wasn’t proper prepared for the voyage but as he signed a contract he did his work and didn’t go the Dutch consul fearing that if he complained he didn’t get any work in the future. The equipage master of the company had told him that everything they needed was on board. There was however none reserve lanterns or red lights. He left the Richelieu with the other runners lacking everything as victuals, mineral oil and lanterns. The runners in service of Tiedeman were fitted out by the latter but refused to shore victuals. Verschoor quitted with being a runner because it was too dangerous work for which wasn’t paid enough for. Master Koenes claimed for the Marine Council that before he left towards Toulon not to be informed in anyway about the ship, he even didn’t know her name. The Marine Council declared the same month that the runners had done well by leaving the ship lacking sufficient equipment and that one tug was not enough but that that at least two tugs had to be available for towing. Koenes had one everything to prepare the ship for the voyage. The Government was responsible for new regulations dealing with the fact that masters of tugs were responsible for the ships they had to tow. (2)
Notes
1. A central battery ship of the by Henri Dupuy de Lôme improved L'Océan-class ordered 1869, laid down 1 December 1869, launched at the shipyard at Toulon, France, launched 3 December 1873, completed 312 April 1875, decommissioned 5 March 1900 and sold to be broken up in 1911. With a displacement of 8,984 metric tons and 8,842 long tons and as dimensions 101,7 x 17,4 x 8,5 meter. Her two 3-cylinder Indret steam engines and 8 boilers supplied 4,600 ihp allowing with the two screws a speed of 12 knots. With a speed of 10 knots she had a range of 3,300 nautical miles. The Richelieu was a combination between a sailing ship and a steamship and was thereby also square rigged. Her crew numbered 750 men. Original armament consisted of 6x1-274mm (10.8”) guns, 5x1-240mm (9.4”) guns, 10x1-120mm (4.7”) guns and off course a plough-shaped ram with an outer length of 3m! The 120mm guns were later replaced by 6-138mm (5.4”) guns. The armour consisted of a 220mm (8.7”) belt, 160mm (6.3”) battery, 100mm (3.9”0 bulkheads and a 10mm(0.4”) deck , strangely were the barbettes not armoured.
2. See for this voyage also other Dutch newspapers.
