Foul play The evidence in Gibraltar failed to support Flood's theories of murder and conspiracy, yet suspicion of foul play lingered. Flood, and some newspaper reports, briefly suspected insurance fraud by Winchester on the basis that
Mary Celeste was heavily overinsured. Winchester refuted these allegations, and no inquiry was instituted by the insurers that issued the policies. In 1931, an article in the
Quarterly Review suggested that Morehouse could have lain in wait for
Mary Celeste, then lured Briggs and his crew aboard
Dei Gratia and killed them there. Paul Begg argues that this theory ignores the fact that
Dei Gratia was the slower ship; she left New York eight days after
Mary Celeste departed and would not have caught
Mary Celeste before she reached Gibraltar. Another theory posits that Briggs and Morehouse were partners in a conspiracy to share the salvage proceeds, although no evidence exists of a friendship between the two captains. Hicks comments, "[I]f Morehouse and Briggs had been planning such a scam, they would not have devised such an attention-drawing mystery." He also asks why Briggs abandoned his son Arthur if he had intended to disappear permanently. In 1925, historian John Gilbert Lockhart surmised that Briggs slaughtered all on board and then killed himself in a fit of religious mania. Lockhart later spoke to Briggs' descendants, and he apologized and withdrew this theory in a later edition of his book.
Macdonald Hastings argues that Briggs was an experienced captain who would not have led a panicked abandonment, writing: "If the
Mary Celeste had blown her timbers, she would still have been a better bet for survival than the ship's boat." According to Hastings, if Briggs had relied on the ship's boat for survival rather than on
Mary Celeste, he would have "behaved like a fool; worse, a frightened one." Arthur N. Putman, a New York insurance appraiser and a leading investigator in sea mysteries in the early 20th century, wrote a similar lifeboat theory, stressing that only a single lifeboat was missing from the vessel. He discovered that the boat's rope was cut, not untied, which indicated that the abandonment of
Mary Celeste was performed quickly. The ship's log contained several mentions of ominous rumbling and small explosion sounds from the hold, although cargos of alcohol naturally emit explosive gas and such sounds are commonly heard. He supposes that a more intense explosion had occurred, and in response, a sailor ventured below deck with an open flame or lit cigar that ignited the fumes, causing an explosion violent enough to dislodge the top of the hatch, which had been found in an unusual position. Putman also postulated that in a panicked terror, the captain, his family, and the crew boarded the lone lifeboat, cut the rope, and abandoned
Mary Celeste.
Natural phenomena Commentators generally agree that some extraordinary and alarming circumstance must have arisen to cause the entire crew to abandon a sound and seaworthy ship with ample provisions. Deveau ventured an explanation based on the sounding rod found on deck. He suggested that Briggs abandoned ship after a false sounding because of a malfunction, perhaps of the pumps, that created a false impression that the vessel was rapidly accumulating water. A severe
waterspout strike before the abandonment could explain the amount of water in the ship and the ragged state of her rigging and sails. The low barometric pressure generated by the spout could have driven water from the bilges up into the pumps, leading the crew to overestimate the amount of water on
Mary Celeste and believe that she was in danger of sinking. Other explanations include the possible appearance of a displaced iceberg, the fear of running aground while becalmed, and a sudden
submarine earthquake. Hydrographical evidence suggests that an iceberg drifting so far south was improbable and other ships would have seen it. The
New York World of January 24, 1886, drew attention to a case in which a vessel carrying alcohol had exploded. The same newspaper's issue of February 9, 1913, cited a seepage of alcohol through a few porous barrels as the source of gases that may have caused or threatened an explosion in
Mary Celestes hold. Briggs' cousin Oliver Cobb was a strong proponent of this theory, in which a sufficiently alarming scenario—rumblings from the hold, the smell of escaping fumes, and possibly an explosion—could have caused Briggs to have ordered the evacuation of the ship. In his haste to leave the ship before it exploded, Briggs may have failed to properly secure the yawl to the tow line. A sudden breeze could have blown the ship away from the occupants of the yawl, leaving them to succumb to the elements. The lack of damage from an explosion and the generally sound state of the cargo upon discovery tend to weaken this case. In 2006, an experiment was performed for
Channel Five television by chemist
Andrea Sella of
University College, London, and the results helped to revive the explosion theory. Sella built a model of the hold, with paper cartons representing the barrels. Using butane gas, he created an explosion that caused a considerable blast and ball of flame, but contrary to expectation, no fire damage occurred within the replica hold. He said: "What we created was a pressure-wave type of explosion. 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." ==Retellings and false histories==