Case ID: johns_8/html/0491-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam,\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Robertson against The Columbian Insurance Company.
    A vessel was insurcci from New-York to premkmi’ of6 s ¡-f actional premium of 2 Per cent‘ Per* mission was given to proceed from Tenerife iifcfand Sfíon£ thence** to ¡£- ce”í„'f ti,e vcs* sel did not proceed to Bonaezsta,andtherisk ended safely.
    
      at^Tenehatfe^sl sioV to enter ov land any part of the cargo, mi-forming a qnabeca»-.» her bill of health was not signed by the Spanish consul, at JYew-YovJe, and the master not choosing to per form the quarantine, went to Madeira, the nearest port where he could enter and land hu cargo, and there sold and delivered the cargo, and then proceeded to the hlo of JyZsit, and there took in a cargo, and arrived at New-York t but having suffered damage by the perils of the sea, on her voyage home, an action was brought on the policy to recover a partial Kbf; s it was held, that the going from Tenerife to Madeira was a deviation, hot that the insmvn •were entitled to a return of premium of one per cent, that part of the voyage to JJotuivzs.ií never having commenced.
    THIS was an action on a policy of insurance, on the * American brig Ohio, from New-York to the island of To neriffe, and at and from thence to New-York, at a prexnium of five and a half per cent. The policy was dated 31st August, 1809. On the 2d September, 1809, the . 1 following clause, by an agreement between the parties, . . was added to the policy, and written in tne margin: “ For the additional premium of two per cent, received this day, permission is given to the brig Ohio to proceed from Tenerife to the Isle of May and Bonavista, and at and from them, or either of them, to New-York ; to return one per cent, if she does not proceed to Bona- . , . , , ,, vista, the risk ending sarely. •
    The Ohio arrived, on the 13th of October, at Oratavia Bau, which is an open road in the island of Tenerife, being her port of destination and where she intended to u 1 m discharge her cargo ; but before the vessel came to anchor, she was visited by a health officer, from the island, who informed the master that the vessel would not be permitted to an entry, or to land any part of her cargo, unt-j s^e jja(j performed a quarantine of 40 days, because her bill of health was not certified by the Spanish consul at New-York; and that if it had been so certified, the quarantine, would have been only eight days, The master wrote to the consignee' on shore, and by his application obtained permission, on the 17th of October, to land the corn, which composed part of the cargo; but the weather was so bad that nothing could be landed, until the 30th of October, on which day the government at Teneriffe prohibited all vessels from New-York from entering and landing their cargoes, unless their bills of health were certified by the Spanish consul. The master of the Ohio then determined to seek another port, and on the 31st of October proceeded to Madeira, which was the nearest port, where he arrived on the 4th of November, and landed and sold th.e cargo. The vessel afterwards proceeded to the isle of May, and sailed from thence for New-York,on the 31st of December, 1809. During her passage, she met with very bad weather, which much injured the hull, sails and rigging, and sustained further injury by striking on a shoal near Great Egg Harbour, on the 6th of February; and on the 8th of February, 1810, she arrived at New-York.
    
    The present action was brought to recover a partial loss on the vessel; and a verdict was taken for the plaintiff, subject to thp opinion of the court, on a case agreed upon by the counsel,
    The case was argued by Colden and Sampson, for the plaintiff, and by S. Jones, jun. and C. I. Bogert, for the defendant.
    The only question argued was, whether there had not been a deviation.
    The plaintiff’s counsel cited Scott v. Thompson, (1 New Rep. or 4 Bos. & Pull. 181.) Suydam & Wyckoff v. The Marine Insurance Company, (2 Johns. Rep. 138.) 
      Reeve and another v. The Commercial Insurance Company, (3 Johns. Rep. 352.)
    The defendants counsel cited Goix v. Low, (1 Johns. Cas. 341. 406.) Suydam & Wyckoff v. Marine Ins. Co. (1 Johns. Rep. 181. 190.) Schmidt v. The United Ins. Co. (1 Johns. Rep. 249. 262.) Speyer v. The New-York Ins. Co. (3 Johns. Rep. 88. 93, 94.) Kane v. The Columbian Ins. Co. (2 Johns. Rep. 264.) 11 East's Rep. 21.
   Per Curiam,

There was no necessity for going from. Teneriffe to Madeira. It was sailing on a different voyage from the one insured.. The master went there to sell his cargo; and for the same reason, he might have gone to Lisbon. It was a voluntary deviation from the voyage zmentioned in the policy. Nothing but necessity, or an apprehension of danger, could excuse his departure from the usual and direct route to Bonavista; and as this part of the voyage xyas abandoned and never commenced, the plaintiff is entitled to a return of the one per cent, premium mentioned in the policy, and no more.

Judgment accordingly. .