Mary Celeste

Mary Celeste (or Marie Celeste as it is fictionally referred to by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and others after him) was a Canadian-
built American-owned merchant brigantine. The ship is famous for having been discovered on 5 December 1872 in the Atlantic
Ocean, unmanned and apparently abandoned (the one lifeboat was missing, along with its crew of seven), although the weather
was fine and her crew had been experienced and capable seamen.
Mary Celeste was in seaworthy condition and still under sail heading toward the Strait of Gibraltar. She had been at sea for a
month and had more than six months' worth of food and water on board. Her cargo was virtually untouched and the crew's
personal belongings including valuables were still in place. None of those on board were ever seen or heard from again and
their disappearance is often cited as the greatest maritime mystery of all time.
[citation needed]

The question of why the crew left Mary Celeste has been the subject of much speculation. Hypotheses include alcohol
fumes, underwater earthquakes, waterspouts to human actions (piracy, mutiny, errors of judgement).
Mary Celeste, with a history of misfortune, was said to be "cursed" even before she was discovered derelict with no apparent
explanation, a classic ghost ship. In 1885, Mary Celeste was destroyed when her last owner intentionally wrecked her off the
coast of Haiti in an attempt to commit insurance fraud.
Disappearance of crew
Departure
While waiting in New York City for a cargo of raw alcohol to be delivered to Mary Celeste, Captain Benjamin Briggs wrote a letter
to his mother in Marion, Massachusetts, who was caring for Briggs's 7-year-old son Arthur. Briggs's wife Sarah and their two-
year-old daughter Sophia would accompany him on the voyage. The letter, dated 3 November 1872, revealed his optimism.
On 5 November 1872, under command of Captain Briggs, Mary Celeste docked on New York City's East River and took on
board a cargo of 1,701 barrels of commercial alcohol intended for fortifying Italian wines on behalf of Meissner Ackermann & Co.
It was worth about $35,000; the ship and cargo together were insured for $46,000. Mary Celeste then set sail from Staten
Island forGenoa, Italy.
In addition to her captain and a crew of seven, she carried the captain's wife, who had sailed with her husband many times, and
Sophia, their 2-year-old daughter. Thus ten people were aboard. Briggs had spent most of his life at sea, and had captained at
least five ships and owned many more. The crew for this voyage included a Dane and four Germans, all of whom spoke fluent
English, had exemplary records, and were considered experienced, trustworthy and capable seamen. The first mate and cook
were Americans.
[citation needed]

Before Mary Celeste left New York, Captain Briggs spoke to an old friend, David Reed Morehouse, from Nova Scotia, who was
captain of the Canadian merchant ship Dei Gratia, also a brigantine. Briggs, Morehouse, and their wives had dinner together on
the evening of 4 November.
[10]
Briggs and Morehouse had served together as sailors when they were young. During the
conversation, they discovered they had a similar course across the Atlantic Ocean, through the Strait of Gibraltar and into
the Mediterranean.
However, Morehouse was still waiting for his cargo to arrive when Mary Celeste left port on 5 November. Morehouse's cargo
eventually arrived and on 15 November, Dei Gratia finally set off with 1,735 barrels (275.8 m
3
) of petroleum in her hold. Dei
Gratia left New York harbour seven days after Mary Celeste (some sources say eight days later).
[11]

Discovery
Sporadic bad weather had been reported in the Atlantic throughout October, although Dei Gratia encountered none and her
journey across the ocean in November was uneventful. Just short of a month after leaving port, on 4 December 1872 (some
accounts state 5 December, which is the equivalent date in nautical days), at approximately 1pm, the helmsman of Dei Gratia,
John Johnson, sighted a ship about five miles (8 km) off their port bow through his spyglass. The position of Dei Gratia was
approximately 3820N 1715WCoordinates: 3820N 1715W, some 600 miles (1,000 km) west of Portugal.
Johnson discerned that there was something wrong with the other vessel. She was yawing slightly, and her sails did not look
right, being slightly torn. Johnson alerted his second officer, John Wright, who looked and had the same feelings about her. They
informed the captain. As they moved closer, they saw the ship was Mary Celeste. Captain Morehouse wondered why Mary
Celeste had not already reached Italy, as she had a head start on his own ship. According to the account given by the crew
of Dei Gratia, they approached to 400 yards (366m) from Mary Celeste and cautiously observed her for two hours. She was
under sail, yet sailing erratically on a starboard tack, and slowly heading toward the Strait of Gibraltar. They concluded she was
drifting after seeing no one at the helm or even on deck, though the ship was flying no distress signal.
[12][13]

Oliver Deveau, chief mate of Dei Gratia, boarded Mary Celeste. He reported that he did not find anyone on board, and said that
"the whole ship was a thoroughly wet mess". There was only one operational pump, two apparently having been disassembled,
with a lot of water between decks and three and a half feet (1.1 m) of water in the hold. However, the ship was not sinking and
was still seaworthy.
[12]

All of the ship's papers were missing, except for the captain's logbook. The forehatch and the lazarette were both open, although
the main hatch was sealed. The ship's clock was not functioning, and the compass was destroyed; the sextant and marine
chronometer were missing. The only lifeboat on the Mary Celeste, a yawl located above the main hatch, was also missing. The
peak halyard, used to hoist the main sail, had disappeared. A rope, perhaps the peak halyard, was found tied to the ship very
strongly and the other end, very frayed, was trailing in the water behind the ship.
[12]

Popular stories of untouched breakfasts with still-warm cups of tea on the cabin table are untrue and most likely originated with
fictionalised accounts of the incident.
[14]
At the inquiry, Oliver Deveau stated that he saw no preparations for eating and there
was nothing to eat or drink in the cabin.
[citation needed]

Deveau returned to his ship and reported to the captain. Two men, Charles Augustus Anderson and Charles Lund, then
boarded Mary Celeste. The cargo of 1,701 barrels of alcohol was, Deveau reported, in good order. However, when it was
eventually unloaded in Genoa, nine barrels were found to be empty.
[11]

A six-month supply of uncontaminated food and fresh water was still aboard, and the crew's personal possessions and artifacts
were left untouched, making a piracy raid seem extremely unlikely. It appeared the vessel had been abandoned in a hurry.
There was no sign of a struggle, or of any sort of violence.
[11]

Report on Mary CelesteInquiry in The New York Times; 24 February 1873
As Dei Gratia was a Canadian vessel of British registry, Captain Morehouse sailed Dei Gratia to Gibraltar; his first mate Oliver
Deveau sailed Mary Celeste to the same destination, arriving a week-and-a-half later. An investigation was held in the Vice
Admiralty Court in Gibraltar to determine the circumstances of Mary Celeste and apportion marine salvage rights.
[citation needed]

During the sitting of the Vice Admiralty Court, the judge praised the crew of Dei Gratia for their courage and skill. The Attorney
General of Gibraltar, Frederick Solly-Flood QC, in his role as Queen's Proctor to the court, deemed it necessary to appoint a
commission of inquiry to investigate the vessel and determine the causes of its abandonment in the middle of the ocean. Copies
of the several log entries were made. The inquiry lasted three months and attracted media attention worldwide.
[citation needed]

Mary Celeste was visited by John Austin, surveyor of shipping in Gibraltar, assisted by an inspector, John McCabe. A local diver
and marine expert named Ricardo Portunato was sent to examine in detail the exterior of the hull on the behalf of the Vice
Admiralty Court. Austin discovered what he believed to be a few spots of blood in the captain's cabin, an "uncleaned"
ornamental cutlass in Briggs's cabin, a knife (without blood), and a deep gash on a railing that he equated with a blunt object or
an axe, but he did not find such a weapon on board. Portunato believed the damage was recent.
[citation needed]
Part of his testimony
reads:
Affidavit of Ricardo Portunato, Diver
In the Vice Admiralty Court of Gibraltar. The Queen in Her Office of Admiralty Ag't. - The Ship or Vessel name unknown
supposed to be called the Mary Celeste and her Cargo found derelict.
I, Ricardo Portunato of the City of Gibraltar, Diver make oath and say as follows:
1. I did on Monday the 23rd day of Decbr. last by direction of Thomas Joseph Vecchio Esqr. Marshal of their Honble. Court and
of Mr. John Austin Surveyor of Shipping for the port of Gibraltar proceed to a ship or vessel rigged as a Brigantine and supposed
to be the Mary Celeste then moored in the port of Gibraltar and under arrest in pursuance of a warrant out of their Honble. Court
as having been found derelict on the high Seas for the purpose of examining the State and condition of the hull of the said
vessel below her water line and of ascertaining if possible whether she had sustained any damage or injury from a collision or
from having struck upon any rock or shoal or otherwise howsoever.
2. I accordingly minutely and carefully examined the whole of the hull of the said vessel and the stern keel, stern post and rudder
thereof.
3. They did not nor did any or either of them exhibit any trace of damage or injury or any other appearances whatsoever
indicating that the said vessel had had any collision or had struck upon any rock or shoal or had met with any accident or
casualty. The hull Stern, [sic] keel Sternpost and rudder of the said vessel were thoroughly in good order and condition.
4. The said vessel was coppered the copper was in good condition and order and I am of opinion that if she had met with any
such accident or casualty I shld. have been able to discover and shld. have discovered some marks or traces thereof but I was
not able to discover and did not discover any.
[15]

Horatio J. Sprague, Consul of the United States in Gibraltar, also wanted an investigation because American citizens were
involved in the Mary Celeste incident, and Americans had possibly been murdered. He asked immediately for a visit to the ship
by his personal representative, United States Navy Captain R. W. Shufeldt of the frigate USS Plymouth.
[12]
Shufeldt's brief visit
aboard Mary Celeste led him to challenge the report of his British colleagues. For him, the cuts were mere scratches that could
have been caused by anything, and the "traces of blood" did not appear to be so to him, but instead were rust. "Blood" seen on
an "uncleaned" sword was also rust according to Sprague and Shufeldt, who conducted scientific tests on it to prove it was
rust.
[citation needed]

There was no evidence of piracy or foul play, nor of mutiny, struggle or violence. Eventually, the salvagers received payment,
amounting to one-sixth of the $46,000 ($741,000 in current money) insurance covering the ship and its cargo, indicating that the
authorities were suspicious of the Dei Gratia crew.
[11][16]
The commercial alcohol aboard Mary Celeste, being heavily insured,
was sailed to Genoa by George W. Blatchford, as originally intended; as previously stated nine barrels were found to be empty
on being unloaded.
[citation needed]

The results of the commission of inquiry encouraged the authorities in Washington, D.C. to send instructions to all consuls and
officers in their ports to report anybody matching the description of Briggs or other crew members of Mary Celeste, or any group
that could have landed sailors belonging to the Mary Celeste. Word was also sent to look for any of the items missing from Mary
Celeste, such as the two pumps or her navigation equipment. No information was reported. Locals at ports in the Azores were
questioned, but none was able to provide assistance.
[citation needed]

Later history and fate[edit]
Of all the unlucky vessels I ever heard of, she was the most unlucky.
[17]

David Cartwright, an owner of the ship
James Winchester considered selling Mary Celeste after the mysterious events for which she was now notable. His mind was
made up when the vessel claimed the life of his father, Henry Winchester-Vinters, who drowned in an accident
in Boston,Massachusetts, when she was brought back to America. Winchester sold Mary Celeste at an enormous loss. Over the
next 13 years, the ship changed hands 17 times. By then, Mary
Her last captain and owner, identified as G. C. Parker, made no profit whatsoever and deliberately wrecked Mary Celeste in an
attempt to commit insurance fraud in the Caribbean Sea on 3 January 1885. She was loaded with an over-insured cargo of
scrap, including boots and cat food. The plan did not work, as the ship failed to sink after being run onto Rochelais reef
[18]
off the
western coast of Port-au-Prince, Haiti, and south of Gonve Island.
[19]
Parker then tried to burn the wreck, but even after the fire
the vessel remained intact, although the ship's log was destroyed along with Benjamin Briggs' prior entries in it.
[citation needed]

Parker then filed an exorbitant claim for a cargo that never existed; a subsequent investigation revealed the fraud.
[20]
Parker sold
the salvage rights for $500, claiming that there were 125 casks of Bass ale on board, 975 barrels of herring and $1000 in cutlery
among other items. None of these items were actually on board. The ship and its cargo was insured by five companies for a total
of $34,000.
[17]

Captain Parker was arrested and put on trial for barratry (the intentional destruction of a vessel). At the time, the sentence for
doing so was death, so despite the clear evidence of the fraud and of Parker's guilt, the jury deadlocked, with five of the twelve
jurors refusing to send him to death. Jurors routinely refused to convict people of this crime due to the death penalty, and the law
was revised three years later so that it was no longer a capital offence.
[17]

Despite Parker's acquittal, nearly everyone indicted for actions related to the shipwreck went bust, and Captain Parker himself
died three months later.
[17]
The partially burnt hulk of Mary Celestewas deemed beyond repair and she was left to slip off the
shoal and sink.
[citation needed]

On 9 August 2001, an expedition headed by author Clive Cussler (representing the National Underwater and Marine Agency)
and Canadian film producer John Davis along with divers from the Nova Scotian company EcoNova announced that they had
found the remains of the brigantine where Parker had wrecked her. A detailed magnetometer survey of the bay, off the Isle de
Gonve, revealed that only one shipwreck was present - and that it had run onto Rochelois Reef with great force. The damaged
coral from its impact delineated a battered channel with the wreck firmly set onto the reef. Maritime archaeologist James P.
Delgado identified the wreck as Mary Celeste based on the location (18.641238 N, 73.206750 W), the fact that no other wreck
was present in the bay and by analyzing vessel fastenings, ballast, timber, and evidence of the fire. All of the evidence, including
a mix of Nova Scotian and New England and Southern U.S. timbers matched the wreck with historical accounts of Mary
Celeste.
[21]

One researcher has disputed Cussler's claim. Scott St George of the University of Minnesota and formerly of the Laboratory of
Tree-Ring Research at the University of Arizona analyzed samples from pine wood fragments recovered from the site in order to
reconstruct the year the timber in question was harvested using dendrochronology. Based on this, St George concluded that the
wood was cut from trees still living at least a decade after Mary Celeste sank,
[22]
putting the authenticity and identification of this
shipwreck in question. St George's reconstruction of several fragments to assemble a tree ring sequence has also been
questioned; the preponderance of evidence is that the wreck lies at the historically documented site of its loss.
[citation needed]

Speculation and theories[edit]
Since her discovery in 1872, many theories have been proposed to explain the mystery of Mary Celeste.
Vapour emission from barrels of alcohol[edit]
The most plausible explanations are all based on the barrels of alcohol.
[11]
Captain Briggs had never hauled such a dangerous
cargo before, and did not trust it. The idea was put forth by the ship's major shareholder, James Winchester, and is the most
widely accepted explanation for the crew's disappearance.
Nine of the 1,701 barrels of alcohol in the hold were later discovered to be empty. They had been made of red oak, not white
oak as the others.
[11]
Red oak is more porous and thus more likely to emit vapor. This would have caused a build-up of vapour in
the hold.
[11]
Poorly secured barrels could rub against each other, and friction between the barrels' steel bands could cause
sparks. The possibility of explosion, however remote, might have panicked the crew into abandoning ship.
[11]

Historian Conrad Byers believed Captain Briggs ordered the hold to be opened, resulting in a violent rush of fumes and steam.
Believing his ship was about to explode, he ordered everyone into the lifeboat, failing to properly secure it to the ship with a
strong towline. The wind picked up and blew the ship away from them. Those in the lifeboat would either have drowned or died
of hunger, thirst or exposure.
A refinement of this theory was proposed in 2005 by German journalist Eigel Wiese. At his suggestion, Dr Andrea Sella
at University College London created a reconstruction of the ship's hold in 2006 to test the theory of the alcohol vapour's ignition.
Using butane as the fuel and paper cubes as the barrels, the hold was sealed and the vapour ignited. The force of the explosion
blew the hold doors open and shook the scale model. Ethanol burns at a relatively low temperature with a flash point of 13C or
55.4F. A minimal spark is needed, for example from two metal objects rubbing together. But none of the paper cubes were
damaged, or even scorched. This theory may explain the remaining cargo being found intact and the fracture on the ship's rail,
possibly by one of the hold doors. Perhaps this fire in the hold would have been violent enough to scare the crew into lowering
the boat, but the flames would not have been hot enough to leave burn marks. What we created was a pressure-wave type of
explosion, says Sella. There was a spectacular wave of flame but, behind it, was relatively cool air. No soot was left behind
and there was no burning or scorching."
[23]
Brian Dunning in a Skeptoid podcast on this subject adds, "The ethanol vapors in the
Mary Celeste's hold would burn even cooler and quicker than butane, though probably much less dramatically, with a blue or
invisible flame, unlike the butane's yellow flash. But it certainly would have been every bit as alarming to the crew, if it had
happened."
[24]

A frayed rope trailing in the water behind the ship is suggested as evidence that the crew remained attached to the ship, hoping
the emergency would pass. The ship was abandoned while under full sail and a storm was recorded shortly thereafter. It is
possible that the rope to the lifeboat parted because of the force from the ship under full sail. A small boat in a storm would not
have fared as well as the Mary Celeste. This explanation was expounded in a 2008 investigation and television documentary
that both featured and satisfied one of the descendants of the original ship's captain.
[25]

In recent books, Brian Hicks and Stanley Spicer revived the theory that Captain Briggs opened the hold to ventilate it while
becalmed. The release of noxious alcoholic fumes from the hold might have panicked the captain and crew into abandoning ship
for the yawl tied to the halyard by an inadequate rope. If this broke with a weather change and consequent wind, then it could
easily have explained the sudden and mysterious exit from the ship. Hicks claims that the cargo was a different
material, methanol, which is toxic.
[citation needed]
The records do not support this.
[citation needed]

This theory's main flaw is that the boarding party found the main hatch secured.
[11]
Upon going into the hold they did not report
smelling any fumes or vapour, which would have still smelled very powerful by that point if this theory were correct. Nor did
people who came aboard at Gibraltar and Genoa report smelling any vapours.
[citation needed]
There was no evidence of alcohol
outside the barrels in the hold. What happened to this missing alcohol from the nine empty barrels is as much a mystery as what
happened to the crew, although it could have gone missing at any stage of the journey, from before being put on the ship in New
York to after Gibraltar.
[citation needed]

Piracy[edit]
One reporter for the New York Times suggested that Mary Celeste may have fallen victim to an act of piracy, the crew murdered
and thrown overboard, as Ottoman pirates had been known to operate in the area.
[26]
However, there were no signs of violence
on Mary Celeste.
[11]
Only common navigation equipment was missing; it is unlikely that pirates would fail to remove the cargo or
the crew's valuables after killing the crew.
Mutiny[edit]
Another theory has suggested there was a mutiny among the crew who murdered a tyrannical Briggs and his family, then
escaped in the lifeboat. This theory is strongly discredited by the fact Briggs had no "tyrannical" history to suggest he was the
type of captain to provoke his crew to mutiny. By all accounts, he was well-respected, fair, and able. First Mate Albert
Richardson and the rest of the crew also had excellent reputations and were experienced, loyal seamen.
[14]

Drunkenness[edit]
After the admiralty court proceeding, Solly-Flood proposed that the crew, after consuming the alcohol from the kegs that were
recovered empty, murdered the Briggs family in a drunken stupor. The mutinous crew are then presumed to have deliberately
damaged the vessel to give the illusion of having been forced to abandon it, then they would have left in a lifeboat.
[citation needed]

However, the captain was a teetotaller and unlikely to tolerate drinking on board or a crew inclined to drink alcohol.
[14]
Once
again, there was no trace of struggle or violence aboard the vessel, and the crew had good records.
[11]

Premature abandonment[edit]
A 2007 Smithsonian television documentary proposed the theory that Briggs became convinced that the ship could not proceed
safely to Italy, perhaps when he discovered (by failing to see Europe when expected) that the chronometer was running slow.
This might have led him think that he was much farther east than he actually was, and that one of the two bilge pumps was
choked with foreign matter (coal dust from a previous cargo, wooden debris dropped by carpenters working on the ship in port,
or both) in the bilge water. As a result he may have greatly overestimated how much water was in the bilge. This theory
proposes that Briggs, his family and the crew, believing that the bilge pumps indicated that the ship was sinking, departed the
ship in the lifeboat and headed for Santa Maria Island at the southeast end of the Azores; en route to Santa Maria the lifeboat
sank and never reached shore.
Captain goes down with the ship
"The captain goes down with the ship" is the maritime concept and tradition that a sea captain holds ultimate responsibility for
both his ship and everyone embarked on it, and he will die trying to save either of them. The concept may be expressed as "the
captain always goes down with the ship" or simply the "captain goes down with his ship." Although often associated with
the sinking of the RMS Titanic in 1912 and its captain, Edward Smith, it predates the Titanic by at least 11 years.
[1]
In most
instances the captain of the ship forgoes his own rapid departure of a ship in distress, and concentrates instead on saving other
people. It often results in either the death or belated rescue of the captain as the last person on board.
History
The concept is closely related to another protocol from the nineteenth century, "women and children first." Both reflect the
Victorian ideal of chivalry in which the upper classes were expected to emulate a morality tied to sacred honour, service, and
respect for the disadvantaged. The actions of the captain and men during the sinking of HMS Birkenhead in 1852 prompted
praise from many due to the sacrifice of the men who saved the women and children by evacuating them first. Rudyard Kipling's
poem "Soldier an' Sailor Too" and Samuel Smiles' Self-Help both highlighted the valour of the men who stood at attention and
played in the band as their ship was sinking.
"Death before dishonor" is a broader, modern sentiment that is common in military parlance.
In practice
The idiom literally means that a captain will be the last person to leave a ship alive prior to its sinking or utter destruction, and if
unable to evacuate his crew and passengers, the captain will not evacuate himself. In maritime law the responsibility of the
ship's master for his ship is paramount no matter what its condition, so abandoning a ship has legal consequences, including the
nature of salvage rights. So even if a captain abandons his ship in distress, he is generally responsible for it in his absence and
would be compelled to return to the ship when danger to the vessel has relented. If a naval captain evacuates a vessel in
wartime, it may be considered a capital offense similar to desertion, mutiny, or sedition unless he subsequently destroys the ship
or permits it to sink. Even in peacetime abandoning a ship in distress may be considered a crime that can lead to imprisonment.
Hence, Captain Francesco Schettino, who left his ship in the midst of the Costa Concordia disaster, was not only widely reviled
for his action, but was arrested by Italian authorities on criminal charges.
[2]