Marine deaths index? (BC)

[Mythology]

I have a Percy James Chick who died on the Chehalis when she was rammed by the Princess Victoria at Vancouver, 21 July 1906.

He is not in the BC deaths index. I checked some of the other names given on the memorial in Stanley Park, Vancouver, and they aren't listed either.

I suspect that this may simply be a case of "No body = no certificate", but is there some sort of British Columbia (or Canadian National) Marine Deaths Index that I should be looking at instead?

[Ken Boyce]

Pt1 of 3
Hi Myth

Sorry for the delay in replying but I had to do some basic homework on this which turned out to be a toughie.

My gut reaction was that in 1906 there may have been a difference in how and where deaths were certified and recorded in Canada depending upon ones citizenship status and/or whether the circumstances of a person’s death fell under City, Provincial or Federal jurisdiction

I think that the Citizenship issue is a non-starter as the tug was locally owned and used in local operations. Most likely some, if not, all eight crew members were local lads with citizenship or landed immigrant status (details of the vessel’s ownership – Union Steamship Line - is available at the Vancouver Maritime Museum) http://www.vancouvermaritimemuseum.com

(BTW Google for Union Steamship BC will return details of the employee housing etc.)

[Ken Boyce]

Pt2
The Vancouver City Archives most likely has more details of the accident and the subsequent investigation. Newspaper articles etc. at the Archives should shed light on whether bodies were recovered (I’m willing to jump on a bus and investigate if it is of help)
http://www.city.vancouver.bc.ca/ctyclerk/archives/

Vancouver was incorporated as a city in 1886. Today it is a Chartered City meaning that it does its own thing in many areas normally controlled by the Provincial Government. Today all Marine Activities in Navigable Waters are under Federal jurisdiction. Likewise Vancouver Harbour is also under Federal jurisdiction The difficulty is determining the situation as it was in 1906

The following web site gives some details of the relationship between Federal and Provincial Vital Death Stats as it exists today with a few historical details
www.statcan.ca/english/sdds/3233.htm

I have not checked to see if the timeline for access to the records vary under the different jurisdictions.

The web site does not provide a definitive answer to your question.

[Ken Boyce]

Pt3
I then went trolling and found the following little gem

Duties and responsibilities of the BC Coroner

http://www.bcpublicservice.ca/postings/Min-2006/PSSG/SRF21160.pdf
of which the following is an extract

“Certifies all unnatural deaths under the Vital Statistics Act “

From the above one could deduce that one of two Coroners (BC or Vancouver assuming Van had jurisdiction in 1906) may have certified the deaths (note Federal Government would likely use one of the two Coroners if they were responsible for certification).

The question of the certification and registration without a body still needs to be resolved.

The forgoing begs the question - does the above apply to 1906 marine deaths accidental or otherwise, if so where are the Certificates, are they indexed and are the indexes accessible. Hopefully it is a starting point. One needs to find and review the regulations governing civil and marine registrations circa 1906 I will do some more checking.

Regards

[Mythology]

Thanks for that lot, Ken.
I'll get back to you reasonably shortly - I'm chewing things over in the light of your info and deciding priorities at the moment, just posting this to let you know that I haven't missed it.

:)

[Ken Boyce]

No rush it is Income Tax time here and I won't be going downtown until after Easter

[Ken Boyce]

Vancouver Archive Return from search input Chehalis & 1906

CREATOR/COLLECTOR: Matthews, J.S. (James Skitt), 1878-1970, collector

PRIVATE RECORD #: Add. MSS. 54

LOCATION (in Archives building): 504-A-4 file 507

AVAILABLE IN OTHER FORMAT: Refer to microfiche # AM0054.013.00644

TITLE: Byron, J.A.

SCOPE AND CONTENT NOTE: File includes records relating to "Princess Victoria" collision with tug "Chehalis", 1906, and records relating to Bank of Vancouver, 1912.

PART OF: Major Matthews collection

PART OF SERIES: Topical and categorical files

PART OF SUBSERIES: Topical files

[Ken Boyce]

Pt1 of 4

Hi Myth

I was unable to locate anything concrete regarding the need for a body in 1906 - however there is a pattern for modern day requirement as follows assuming BC has jurisdiction. I leave you to draw any conclusions

1. I located the following but could not find the equivalent for Death Registration Act

Extracts from the 1966 Marriage Act of British Columbia

In matters not provided for law of England prevails
Subject to this Act and any Act of Canada in force in British Columbia, the law of England as it existed on November 19, 1858 prevails in all matters relating to the following:
(a) the mode of solemnizing marriages;
(b) the validity of marriages;
(c) the qualification of parties about to marry;
(d) the consent of guardians or parents, or any person whose consent is necessary to the validity of a marriage.

[Ken Boyce]

Pt 2 of 4
Presumption of death
19 (1) If an order has been granted to an applicant under the Survivorship and Presumption of Death Act, on fulfillment of any preliminary requirements under this Act, an issuer of marriage licences may issue a licence authorizing the solemnization of a marriage to which the petitioner is an intended party.
(2) A licence must not be issued under subsection (1)
(a) unless the petitioner first delivers to the issuer of marriage licences or marriage commissioner a copy of the order of presumption of death certified by the district registrar or deputy district registrar of the court, and also an affidavit by him or her in the form required by the chief executive officer, and
(b) unless the other party to the intended marriage makes and delivers to the issuer of marriage licences or marriage commissioner an affidavit in the form required by the chief executive officer.
(3) The issuer of marriage licences or marriage commissioner must forward the certified order of presumption of death and both affidavits to the chief executive officer.
(4) The requirements of subsections (2) and (3) are in addition to all other requirements under this Act

[Ken Boyce]

Pt 3 of 4
2. Extracted from the BC Survivorship And Presumption Of Death Act
Presumption of death
3 (1) If, on the application of an interested person under the Rules of Court, the court isP satisfied that
(a) a person has been absent and not heard of or from by the applicant, or to the knowledge of the applicant by any other person, since a day named,
(b) the applicant has no reason to believe that the person is living, and
(c) reasonable grounds exist for supposing that the person is dead,
the court may make an order declaring that the person is presumed to be dead for all purposes, or for those purposes only as are specified in the order.
(2) An order made under subsection (1) must state the date on which the person is presumed to have died.
(3) Any interested person may, with leave of the court, apply to the court for an order to vary, amend, confirm or revoke an order made under subsection (1).
(4) An order, or a certified copy of an order, declaring that a person is presumed to be dead for all purposes or for the purposes specified in the order, is proof of death in all matters requiring proof of death for those purposes.
(5) The registrar of the court must forward to the chief executive officer under the Vital Statistics Act an order made under subsection (1) or (3) within 30 days of the entry of the order.

[Ken Boyce]

Pt 4 of 4
3. Extract from the BC Vital Statistics Agency 1999/2000 Annual Report
".......In addition to the above, two additional proposals were submitted to the Legislation & Professional Regulation Branch of the Ministry for consideration but subsequently not submitted to Cabinet:
• Amendments to the Survivorship and Presumption of Death Act to create a central registry of presumption of death orders to be maintained by the Vital Statistics Agency and permitting the issuance of certificates for such records;
• Amendments to the Wills Act to require the mandatory filing of Wills Notices where a person has executed or revoked a will to facilitate estate settlements.

4. 2002 Amendment to BC Vital Statistics Act
Registration of death
20 (1) A vital statistics registrar or the chief executive officer must register a death if the statement and certificate under section 19 are received within one year from the date of the death and the vital statistics registrar or chief executive officer is satisfied as to the truth and sufficiency of the statement.
(2) If a death is not registered within one year from the date of the death, and if application for registration of it is made by any person to the chief executive officer accompanied by the statement and certificate under section 19 and other evidence as may be prescribed, the chief executive officer must register the death if satisfied as to the truth and sufficiency of the matters stated in the application and that the application is made in good faith.
(3) On receiving a court order that declares a person to be presumed dead, the chief executive officer must register the death.
(4) Each month, the chief executive officer must provide to the chief electoral officer a list of the names and addresses of persons whose deaths were registered with a vital statistics registrar or the chief executive officer since the last list was provided.
(5) If requested by the chief electoral officer for the purpose of resolving an objection to the registration of a voter or an elector, the chief executive officer must conduct a search of the register of deaths and report the results to the chief electoral officer.

[Ken Boyce]

Hi Myth
Another little piece of infor

Coroner's Records: The British Columbia Archives has legal custody of coroner's inquests from 1859 to 1967 and coroner's inquiries from 1859 to 1970. Inquests are investigations in which a coroner's jury was called, and the files tend to be larger, often containing witness statements, transcripts and autopsy reports. Inquiries took place when a coroner worked alone, and the record is often a single form containing basic information

I still haven't determined who had jurisdiction and whether as a marine accident there is a seperate database

(At least I'm learning something about Canadian Genealogy)

Regards

[Ken Boyce]

Pt1 of 4
HI Myth
I think I’ve pinned down who had jurisdiction over the Chahalis investigation

Prior to Confederation Canadian marine activities were mainly influenced by the UK Merchant Shipping Act of 1854. After Confederation in 1867 the Canadian Department of Marine and Fisheries was formed with headquarters in Ottawa.

This new department had the mandate to administer the following

"Sea-Coast and Inland Fisheries, Trinity Houses, Trinity Boards, Pilots, Decayed Pilots Funds, Beacons, Buoys, Lights and Lighthouses and their maintenance, Harbours, Ports, Piers, Wharves, Steamers and Vessels belonging to the Government of Canada (except gunboats or other vessels of war), harbour commissioners, harbour masters, classification of vessels, examination and granting of certificates of masters and mates, and others in the merchant service, shipping masters and shipping offices, inspection of steamboats and board of steamboat inspection, enquiries into causes of shipwrecks, establishment, regulation and maintenance of marine and seamen hospitals, and care of distressed seamen, and generally such matters as refer to the marine and navigation of Canada.

[Ken Boyce]

Pt2 of 4
The setting up of the Federal Dept to oversee Canadian Marine law had little affect in British Columbia for some years as the Colony did not enter Confederation until July 1871 which was not legally ratified until the necessary amendments to the Canadian Act were proclaimed in 1873.

There appears to be little information on marine legislation in BC prior to the Provinces entry into Confederation There were very few lights and buoys. The old BC Colonial Government employed an inspector of steam boilers, however his duties did not include the inspection of steamships, When the Federal Department of Marine and Fisheries initially took over jurisdiction of the British Columbia marine lights and buoys system after 1871 the Surveyor General’s Office of the new province was appointed to act for the Federal Dept until a local Federal Marine Agent was appointed.

Following changes to the Canadian Act admitting BC into the Confederation the new BC Marine Agent assumed responsibility for the inspection of navigation lights and for the inspection of steamboats. The timeline of the implementation on the west coastal waters of the other duties of the Federal Agency is vague. However I think it reasonable to assume that by 1906 the Dept would have fully exercised its mandate over marine affairs in BC.

There is one caveat - under the UK Colonial Laws Validity Act of 1865, the legal position was that the UK statutes for merchant shipping whether enacted before or after the 1867 Confederation and 1873 amendments took precedence over any contradictory colonial laws. I believe this state of affairs existed until the Canadian Shipping Act of 1906.

[Ken Boyce]

Pt3 of 4
Who’s Coroner
I came across this Federal statement regarding marine accidents which supports my earlier note re provincial coroners being used by the Feds

“If a transportation accident involves fatalities, a representative of the provincial or territorial coroner or a medical examiner is sent to the site. The coroner’s responsibilities include conducting autopsies where necessary and determining the cause of death. The coroner may decide to hold a coroner’s inquest into the circumstances surrounding the deaths. This inquest is normally held two to six months after the accident”

I also looked into which Coroners would have existed in the 1906 There was a Vancouver City Coroner in existence as far back as 1886 (William Joseph McGuigan).

The Provincial Archives have the BC Coroners records back to 1859

[Ken Boyce]

Pt 4 of 4
Summarizing

The most likely agent that had jurisdiction over the accident investigation in 1906 was the Dept of Marine and Fisheries a Federal Agency

There existed two Coroners in 1906 however the Provincial Coroner would most likely have been involved

The Provincial Coroners Records dating from 1859 are archived in the Provincial Archives in Victoria there is a 100yr rule which can be circumvented
http://www.bcarchives.gov.bc.ca/general/guides/ag_coro.pdf

Private papers connected to the accident are available at the Vancouver City Archives

A body may not have been necessary to issue a death Cert under the Vital Statistics and the Presumption of Death Acts but someone would have had to pursue this.

[Mythology]

Thanks for all that lot Ken. :)

I'll skip the bit I'm most interested in until the end.

Firstly, Percy James Chick is very low on my priority list - history tends to stop around 1900 with me, and the death of somebody in 1906 is not something that I want to spend an enormous amount of time, effort, or money on, especially as I know basically what happened, when I am, for instance, still lacking a couple of dozen wills from earlier years which may contain vital clues to missing family members.

Most of it has, therefore, been filed for later reference. The original question was whether or not there was a marine deaths index which I should be looking at, and if the answer was "Yes", then I'd have ordered the cert just to tidy things up, but I don't really want to get too tied up in anything much more complicated than that at present.

As the answer seems to be "It doesn't look like it, but there's a ton of other things you could look at instead", while all of it is interesting, I think the best thing is to look at it from a different angle - rather than getting hung up on a death certificate which probably won't tell me anything that I don't know, what is likely to give me the most additional information about the incident for the least effort and expense?

(continues)

[Mythology]

Now, I had already found the Maritime Museum, but I am a little confused by something in their description of the incident in the blurb about the latch that they have.
"Out of fifteen aboard CHEHALIS, only eight survived, plucked from the cold water by Brockton Point lighthouse keeper William Jones. Other than those bodies, a few fragments of wood, including the cabin door this latch came from, were all that was recovered."

1) If there were fifteen on board and eight survived, that means seven died, so why are there eight names on the memorial? Did somebody "survive" in the sense that they lived to be rescued, but died on shore as a result of their injuries?
2) Having said that eight survived, pulled out by Mr Jones, they say "other than those bodies". To refer to those living as "bodies" seems a little odd to me. Given the way the Chehalis was chewed up by the Princess Victoria, I suspect that odd wording is all it is, but I could be wrong - do they actually mean that the bodies of those who died were recovered?

(continues)

[Mythology]

Finding the answer, and getting more information on the incident without spending ages ploughing through reams of witness statements to the coroner and the board of inquiry may lie in this bit of yours:
"The Vancouver City Archives most likely has more details of the accident and the subsequent investigation. Newspaper articles etc. at the Archives should shed light on whether bodies were recovered (I’m willing to jump on a bus and investigate if it is of help)"

Newspaper articles, while not always entirely accurate, are usually very informative. I'll keep this brief as I don't want to go off the track too much, but it is thanks to newspaper articles and letters in them that I've solved a little puzzle with the wife of one of mine who drowned when the ship they were on went down in the Bay of Biscay in 1866, despite the name being incorrectly reported at first. She's Australian born, but I already knew that she was buried here in England at Abney Park - how did she end up there? His body wasn't found, hers was washed up on an island off the coast of Brittany, and the British Consul at Brest was involved. Here, we do definitely have a body - but she does not appear in either the marine deaths index or the consular deaths index, so no help there! However, I now know that her brother in law in London recognised the incorrectly reported name and tootled off to France pronto to bring the body back. :)

I think that a newspaper report is likely to be more informative than a possible coroner's report aimed principally at determining the cause of death or a long-winded inquiry aimed at putting the blame on someone. Do you agree?

If so - just how easy is it to jump on a bus to Vancouver and investigate?

There is absolutely no rush on this - I'm about to move home and am trying not to do anything at the moment anyway, and I wouldn't feel comfortable with you spending ages digging out everything possible on something as low priority as this, but if newspaper reports are *easily* tracked down and you can either obtain copies without a lot of hassle or provide me with references so that I can tell Vancouver Archives exactly what I want, these are likely to be extremely useful and informative, and it would be very much appreciated.

[Mythology]

Afterthought, for clarity.

"a newspaper report is likely to be more informative"

By this, I mean as far as a summary of the basic events are concerned, not that newspaper reports are likely to contain more *detail* than coroners reports and board of inquiry reports.

[Ken Boyce]

Hi Myth

I think many of us are also finding that we have to decide on our priorities in pursuing our pre 1837 or post 1901.family history. There are only so many hours in a day and the amount of data that one accumulates in connection with ones family history just seems to pile up awaiting processing whilst the remaining sand in Father Time’s glass gets less and less by the day.

I myself have spent the past 12 months roughing in a post 1900 family tree based on my own personal knowledge and experience of my UK family connections while growing up during WW2. These people are largely unknown to my Canadian family and my intent is to record my reminiscences of this side of the family before I pass on.

Next on the list is my wife’s post 1900 Cornish connection based on her personal knowledge gained from living with her Grandparents who arrived in Canada in 1920.

I decided that the pre 1837 and completion of the 1837-1900 periods can be carried out by any knowledgeable researcher as I do not have any more of an unique perspective of our family than anyone else during these periods. That doesn’t mean I’m not interested in those periods of our family, far from it as I tend to wander across the spectrum depending on the motivation of the day. It is a question of having some goals which leads me back to Percy

I found your posting motivating as previously I had little knowledge of Canadian Genealogy and no knowledge of the Chehalis incident even after having strolled past the monument on numerous occasions. I found the whole exercise stimulating and will at sometime in the near future drop by the City Archives (which I haven’t visited for some yrs and is only 30 mins by car) and the Marine Museum (they are 10mins walk apart in a beautiful shoreline park setting) to follow up on the newspaper reports. I will also look into what's available in our local newspaper archives.

Regards

[Jfremont]

Hello Myth and Ken,

I have followed this thread with interest. Since I work near the Vancouver Library, I dropped in today to check the newspaper archives. The Vancouver Province has many reports of the sinking of the Chehalis. I copied some reports from July 21 through to July 28 which I could forward if you wish. They are not very readable in some cases unfortunately.
It would appear that the saga of the sinking probably was on going for many months. After a week they were still trying to locate the sunken wreck and had not recovered any bodies. The first account in the July 21 edition lists 9 drowned and five saved. But three of the drowned are unnamed and there is no Percy James Click listed.
I could easily go through the archives some more, but since Ken offered to go to the other archives I don't wish to butt in.

John

[Ken Boyce]

Hi John

Your input is welcome as I cannot get to the Archives until May

Regards

[Mythology]

Hi John

That's brilliant - thank you very much for that.
"The Vancouver Province has many reports of the sinking of the Chehalis. I copied some reports from July 21 through to July 28 which I could forward if you wish."
Yes, I'd love them, of course - but do you mind if we hold fire for a bit?

I am about to move home at the end of next week, things are in chaos here, if British Telecom don't get their act together I may not even have a phone line at the new place for a few days, and I'll probably be stuck with using dial-up instead of broadband for the internet for a week after that.
I'm really trying hard not to get involved in dealing with anything other than the complications of the move at the moment. If you don't mind sitting on them for a couple of weeks, I'd really appreciate it, but if it's a pain, say so and I'll e-mail you on Sunday to discuss costs etc.

Perhaps you and Ken might want to liase to save duplication of effort too?
I'm grateful for what comes, whoever gets it, but I hate to think of you both spending time copying the same thing - I wouldn't know one Archives in Vancouver from the other, so I don't know if we're talking about the same newspaper here or not!

Ken - ummm ... what do you reckon's best here? As I said earlier, there is no rush at all, in fact, as you'll have gathered from the above, delay would be more convenient, so the fact that you can't get there until May isn't holding me up with anything!

[Jfremont]

Hi Myth,

It is no problem for me to hold the copies I have made so far. I will wait until you have made your move. I know how stressful that can be.

There were a few other newspapers here at that time but I believe the Vancouver Province would have been one of the main ones. There was the Victoria Colonist as well but I suspect both would have reported about the same. I could do a sample check on that.

The problem is copying the articles so they are readable from the microfilm. I might find it easier to print them and then mail them to you rather than trying to email them after scanning. I could scan and email some to start if you like so you can see what they look like. But again I will wait until you say you are ready after the move. I will drop into the library again next week and have a further look. It is close to my office so a lunch hour visit is easy.

If Ken feels I should hold off until he checks the city archives, I am sure he will respond to this thread shortly.

Regards, John

[Ken Boyce]

Hi John and Myth

Myth, your first priority must be to safeguard the integrity of the sofa and its contents. I can attest from experience that if you disgorge the contents into cardboard boxes that all will be lost. Some eighteen years after my last change of abode I’m still finding that these abysses of cubic cardboard and scotch tape are still unyielding in their hold on their contents and that no amount of fuzzy logic can decipher the encoded outer markings. I suggest that for the greater good of this forum it is paramount that you obtain a roll of 2mm thick decorators clear plastic sheeting with which to cocoon the sofa and with contents untouched, such that the sofa and its organised chaotic contents will survive the ordeal unscathed and un-dischaoticthised. At journeys end a sharp razor and a litre of Vino will restore all to normal.

John - regarding the Chehalis Affair, I’m in agreement with Myth that the Newspaper approach is the way to go.

I’m located near SFU and would have to jump a bus and use the same downtown Newspaper Archive sources as you (the City Archives do not maintain a comprehensive old newspaper collection and SFU lists nothing) so it is logical for you and Myth to work together on this. If the newspaper route results in the need to do some time consuming work at the City Archives or the Maritime Museum and possibly Victoria as a retiree I would have the time to follow-up.

Regards

[Mythology]

John:
"It is no problem for me to hold the copies I have made so far."
Oh good.
I, too, am in favour of the postal idea for preference, but I don't trust our local sorting office to handle the mail redirect properly, I expect to lose a fair precentage of stuff addressed to my current hovel, and there have been so many hold-ups on this move that until I'm actually there I can't be 100% certain that I *will* be there (if that makes sense), so I'm not giving anyone my new address yet just in case!
I'll get back to you as soon as I'm organised.
Thanks.

Ken:
"I’m in agreement with Myth that the Newspaper approach is the way to go.
I’m located near SFU and would have to jump a bus and use the same downtown Newspaper Archive sources as you ..."
OK, we're talking about the same paper(s) then, so I'll see how John and I get on with things and maybe get back to you if needed.
Thanks again for your research into the various possibilities.

[Jfremont]

Hi Myth,

I had a further look at the newspaper archives today. I trawled the second week after the event through to August 6. There was no mention in the second week of the accident until August 6. There was an inquiry of sorts set up right away at what is termed a police court which was directed at determining the cause of the accident.
But up to August 6 they had not found the sunken wreck and no signs of bodies either. I have been trying to find some mention of your man but none so far, or for that matter any of the others who were unnamed in the passenger list which was reported on the first day. I will work further through the newspaper in the coming days.
It is no problem to copy the articles as I come across them and will hold them and send them on in due course.

John

[Jfremont]

Hello Myth

A brief progress report. I went back to look at other newpapers of the day and found the Vancouver Daily World which published from 1898 to 1924 seemed to have better reports. There is an account of Percy J. Chick on board by one of the survivors and what their conversation was about as they had lunch moments before the collision. Also there is a picture of Percy. So now I am slowly working through this paper.
The captain of the CPR ship (Princess Victoria), Captain Griffin was charged with manslaughter about three days after the collision. It seems unbelieveable they could do it so quickly but it was a different time I guess.
I am having quite a time copying the large pages of the paper. It takes as many as 6 letter pages in some cases. It will be quite a job for you to read it but this is the best I can do.
I checked Henderson's directory for the City of Vancouver and found Percy J. Chick in 1905 (address 805 Bute) and 1906 (address 661 Granville St.). He is shown as a purser both years on the SS Cassiar which was a Union Steamship vessel. But from the reports it seems he must have resigned from that job and was secretary to a company that had oyster leases up the coast. In fact they were on their way north to visit these leases when the accident occurred.
My progress is slow and hope you can be patient.
John

[Mythology]

Hi John

"My progress is slow and hope you can be patient."

Absolutely no rush - I'm in chaos here. My move which should have happened a week ago has been "sort of" delayed - I have the keys, but BT can't get a phone line in until the 12th so I'm currently living half in the old place, half in the new! Sometime tomorrow or Wednesday the PC will get packed up and I'll be offline for a bit - hopefully only until Friday, but BT have a habit of not keeping appointments so it may be longer.

You're doing a fine job - the Vancouver Daily World certainly sounds the goods, that's excellent stuff, and if you don't mind struggling with the copying (I don't expect miracles!) then just carry on as and when it suits you, and I'll get in touch again when I'm up and running properly again.

I wonder how much was involved in being secretary to this oyster company? A number of my lot seem to have held down two or three jobs at a time, so it wouldn't surprise me if he was both!

Anyway, this is better than I'd hoped for, very much appreciated.

Cheers.

[Jfremont]

Hello Myth,

At long last I am reporting my progress... very slow...

I have gone about as far as I can go I think. I looked through the newspaper records from 21 July, 1906 through to 30 Oct, 1906. As mentioned previously, there was an inquiry immediately after the accident. The inquiry reported findings reported on 10 Sept, 1906 in which the CPR and specifically the captain of Princess Victoria as being at fault. His certificate was suspended for six month. After that date, the CPR requested the right to appeal but it was denied.
As far as I can tell, there does not appear to have been an inquest in to the deaths. At least no mention in the news reports or in a couple books I found which mentions the accident. No bodies were found after the accident.

I have visited the monument which was erected after the accident and taken some pictures. I have taken copies of pages from a couple books where Percy Chick is mentioned as being the purser on various Union Steamship vessels. I have copied pictures of these vessels as well. I also kept an eye open when going through the newspaper for obituaries but nothing showed up.

This has been an interesting exercise for me. I have passed by the monument in Stanley Park over the years and have read the inscription but never took the time to check further. Now I know more. There seemd to be numerous marine accidents going on in those days. But the Chelalis accident got a lot of publicity I think, because the CPR was involved.

John

[Mythology]

Hi John

Nice timing - I was discussing this with a couple of friends only a few days ago, and intended getting in touch with you very shortly anyway, but I'm way behind with everything, have only just replied to a PM of Stella's from the 31st!

"I have gone about as far as I can go I think."
Yes, I agree - further than I expected, actually. If the official inquiry reported their findings in September, I wouldn't expect to find much after that, possibly a few letters from disgruntled people who didn't like the report, but unlikely to be anything of real significance, and if you've gone up to the end of October, I reckon we can fairly safely say it's over as far as the papers are concerned.

"No bodies were found after the accident."
Right - that's cleared that up. I suspected it was the case, but that wording in the Maritime Museum note wasn't too clear. In the circumstances, I wouldn't expect there to be any sort of death cert, so I'll forget chasing that completely - we know what happened, I don't need an official death record just for the sake of it, and what you've found is far more informative and interesting than a cert would be anyway.

I'll e-mail you (tomorrow probably) re contact details etc., need to have a bash at another thread tonight and the fingers aren't up to much right now.

Thanks again for all the effort you've put in on this. :)