I am continually surprised by the Rohilla's ability to renew my interest, when from time to time new developments come along. The latest of these developments coming in the rather large form of an ex lifeboat. After so many years have passed by since the tragedy of the Rohilla's loss I had not considered that any of the lifeboats involved in the Rohilla tragedy would still exist today. Of the six lifeboats involved in efforts to rescue people stranded aboard the wreckage, the Whitby Number 2 lifeboat, John Fielden was wrecked herself on scene.
In such an extraordinary feat the John Fielden was hauled by hand over the pier wall before being man handled over the scar before she could be launched into the boiling surf. This amazing feat was not the only one witnessed at the time and one cannot fail to be amazed by yet another arduous task plan. It was decided to take the Upgang lifeboat William Riley of Birmingham & Leamington six miles over land to a point on top of the cliffs adjacent to what remained of the once proud ship. The lifeboat was lowered down a 200 ft perpendicular cliff by hand in a manoeuvre that would be almost un-thought of today, even with today's technological advances. Sadly the sea conditions were too rough for the lifeboat to launched straight away, to the severe disappointment to all those present.
The lifeboat was spotted on the Internet auction website Ebay although in a sorry state. A price was agreed to see the lifeboat removed from the auction. The buyer initially thought that the lifeboat should be transported from Devon to Newbiggin, Northumberland where she could be restored beside another lifeboat the Mary Joicey. However, contact with interested people in Whitby revealed an incredible level of enthusiasm for seeing the lifeboat returned to Whitby for possible restoration.
A meeting of interested parties was held with sufficient numbers to form a trust to oversee the restoration of the lifeboat . It would likely be quite a task at cost to have the boat fully restored and would certainly require a band of willing supporters. With my obvious interest in the Rohilla I was invited to become a trustee and I was only to happy to accept the invitation. The restoration of the lifeboat could only be done if a suitable base was found? The photograph to the right is a clear example of the task ahead in restoring the former lifeboat.
On the 12th August 2005 a meeting was held to discuss the task of getting the lifeboat from Barnstaple in Devon, where she was found, back to Whitby. A number of visits had been made to the location of the lifeboat to assess its position.
It was found on a grass bank some distance from the water where it would only float on really high tides. Friday the 19th August coincided with a large tide and it was decided that this was the best opportunity of retrieving the lifeboat. a team of willing volunteers departed hoping to retrieve the former lifeboat. Jeff Robinson of Skinningrove Transport had generously offered the use of a truck and driver to bring the William Riley home to Whitby. Once afloat the lifeboat had to be manoeuvred into deeper water in order to get the boat into a more accessible position, it was dragged around an obstacle course of other discarded craft towards a quayside where she could be craned out of the water. There was also some concern that with the existing holes in the lifeboats bottom that she will take on water as she moved from her point of safety to the quayside. The holes have been patched as best as can be but the team have taken with them additional materials to cope with any water ingress. As it was, the lifeboat was successfully floated, moved and recovered onto the truck ready for its return to Whitby.
Unfortunately it has not been all plain sailing and the trust faced a serious dilemma when the work approached the replacement of the decking. The town is well known for its shipbuilding and skilled traditional boat builders, yet there were moves to award the contract for the decking to a company that would be doing the work with the boat in its base at Northumberland. A number of trustees had concerns about the boat leaving Whitby and a fierce debate ensued. There has been a level of animosity that I would never have expected and underhand tactics that would shame any responsible trustee. I was told by the Chairman in no uncertain terms that my involvement as a trustee was not what I believed it to be. It was explained that only those actively working on the boat on a regular basis were allowed any involvement in the decision making process, something which practically eliminated over 60% of the trustees? I am not (or was not) able to actively work on the boat itself but that did not mean I was not doing my bit. Designing, building and maintaining a comprehensive website for a charitable trust is not something to be taken lightly and as anyone with such responsibilities will confirm it can be a demanding task. I was also canvassing support for the trust form a list of my personal Rohilla contacts with one such endeavour netting the trust fund a £500 donation, but even so it did not make me any more of an equal trustee, how bizarre was that!.
I was adamant that as a trustee I had a responsibility to discharge my duties as a trustee to the best of my ability. I have no qualms in saying that I was one of those concerned about the boat leaving Whitby more so as it was essentially a Whitby based project, it could be said that I may have been the most vocal of those who had concerns. The level of deterioration amongst the trust was severe and the Chairman implied his position was untenable, his reasons being that he was against the trust putting the work out to tender and would have 'nothing to do with it' even though our obligation to the lottery board insisted we should have. The ensuing difficulties resulted in three trustees resigning their place as trustees of which I was one. Whilst one still retains a part time involvement with the practical work the remaining two have chosen to distance themselves from unsavoury elements of the restoration project. When I left the trust I agreed to carry on with the trust website as well as keeping a photographic record, so long as I was notified of any progress. In leaving, the trust was without the key roles of Chairman, Treasurer, and Secretary, but I expected to be made aware of who was taking up the roles. Some weeks passed by without any contact and I simply updated the trust website as best I could. Unfortunately this did not go down very well with the trust, as explained to me in a belligerent telephone call from the Chairman. I was issued a clear directive to amend the website revision to remove any suggestion that there had ever been any problems.
Part of the problems we endured was a host of information that was anything but truthful, one such key piece being the alleged timeframes. It was always accepted that the decking was scheduled for September / October, yet for some unknown reason the ex chairman took it upon himself to change this to July. More importantly without the backing of the trust, and undoubtedly because it would rule out a tender able to carry out the work were the boat was even though it was common knowledge the tender had made it known he was away in July! There was therefore no question of there being any 'delays in finishing the job by the May /June deadline'. This ultimately left only one contractor, the one in Northumberland of which our trust treasurer was also the company and honorary financial treasurer. There was never any question about their ability to do a good job but that does not dismiss the underhand tactics used to award them the contract.
It has pretty much been a sharp learning curve on how false and remorseless some people can be. At times the antics were those one would expect to experience in a school yard, such was the pettiness. To be told I am not qualified to question someone's judgment or that someone could hold themselves so superior that their actions can go unchallenged is totally alien to me and something I find quite distasteful. I fully endorse a level of hierarchy within any organisation but I would not expect the team leader to demand unquestionable loyalty; it was after all a volunteer project not a regimental one? I was misguided into believing I was part of a team charged with overseeing the restoration project. What I held to be a group of equals actually turned out to be a set of circumstances where one man thinks he can rule without question. Had this been made clear at the outset I question whether anyone would have put themselves forward to become a trustee, no one man is that untouchable more so in today's world of equality. It became obvious that I no longer had any welcome within the trust and the lack of contact simply confirmed my standing to carry on with the trust website. This whole unsavoury saga has been complex and drawn out with some very involved issues? I was told that I no longer had the permission to amend any of the web pages dedicated to the trust without permission. It was however largely academic as the trust allowed the website domain name to expire despite the numerous reminders I sent them?
I have now concluded the process to divorce myself from the trust completely, which is quite a shame given the project seemed such a promising one. I still maintain an interest in the lifeboat itself because it has a unique connection to the Rohilla even with the trouble and overpowering egos that I feel marred the project.
Copyright © Colin Brittain 1999 - 2008