The Express.
London, England, 1848-07-06 00:00:00

COURT OF QUERN'S BENCH..

Not Piono.—Before Justice Wight/tun aid a Special Jury.
SMALL AND OTHCID. C. NAIRNZ AND ANOTHER.—
MARINE INE.URANCE —Sir F. Kelly, Mr. Serjeatit Shee,
and Mr. Unthank, appeared for the plaintiffs ; and Sir F.
Thesiger, Mr. Wilde, tend another learned gentleman, were
counsel for the defendants. Thii was an action brought
neuinst the defendants as the representatives of the Marine
Insurance Company, upon a palicy of insurance effected
with that company, on a vessel called the Susan. The
plaintiffs were the agents of Messrs. Geigel, of the Mauri-
tius., to whom the ship in question belonged; and the
p elicy upon which the present action was brought, was a
time policy effected on the 21th September, 1843. There
was a clause in the policy by which the defendants agreed
to treat the Susan as a ship that was seaworthy
ar the time when the policy was effected. The sum for which
the v. 4a I was invited was 1.:.001., and the prem'uns was
15 ;,uineas per cent. The di fendants had paid 6001. into
court, admitting a partial loss, but had relived to pay the
halanc , which, after making certain &ductless, was 4021.
odd. The circumstances under which the Susan was lost
were shortly thee. In the month of July, 1843, she sailed
front the Mauritius to Madras, wile re she arrived safely. In
September, in the same year, she left Madras for the Mewl-
tin, with a cargo of 258 coolies. Some tine after she had
put to sea the vessel was found to be is a bad cundit on, and
the captain determined on putting into Trincomalee (or the
purpo c of csaminiug, and, if necessary, repairing, the 'hip ;
hut, owing to one of the coolies having the
entail-pox, the captain was informed that he must
either set sail or ;a rform quarantine. He then decided upon
teturoing to 4.lwirae, which lie accordingly did, discharged
his c into, and put the coupes on board another vessel. The
Susan was then 'nestled by several competent tiersons at
Madras, who advised the captain to take her to a place calied
Corringa. about 300 miles from Madras, for the purpose of
having her repaired, as there were no means of doing so at
the latter Mace. The vessel accordingly left Madras for
Corringa, and arrived off that port en the 9th orOctober,
1513, but owing to a heavy gale a.. 1 the strong current, she
were unable to make the harbour, and compell.d to put
back to a place calied Maeurapatam, where the
vessel was found to be so seriously injured, having lost all her
moos a• el being ver. i:alcy, that it was deemed advi,able
fur the fe nth: ;earths that the ihototi
as a t tel ion, which was accordingly done. The ship was
then broken up and sold fir 1,5001. In proof of the case of
the plaintiff\ the examinations of Captain Poet, the com-
mander attic Susan, awl Captain Allen, one of the parties
who :urve!es: the ship. wire put in and read, but they con-
tained no new tarts in adeliticn to thew) already stated. For
the deft nee it was COM noel that the Susan ought neva to
have left Trincomalee, but shuuld Lave waited there to be
repaired ; the; hi r emii.g to Corringa was a most inspropr
proceeding; and that the conduct of tho captain had not
been that of a prudent uninsured owner.—Mr. Justice
Wislitman, iu sumenine up, left lice distinct questioi n to the
jury, to es:eh at ',Lie.. ha asked them to give a specific
eraser. They were: fleet, Was it the duty of the captain
to stay et Trincomalee; second, \Vas the state of the ship
when at Maxurapatam occasioned by the perils of the sea,
and ci,uld she have been repaired at blezurapwara ; third,
Was the so tax repairable at alasurapatam as to enable her to
mew ed to another port where she might have been better
repaired; Matta, Would a prudent uninsured owner have
sold her, or attempted partially or wholly to have repaired
her; filth, Was the less of the chip occhsioned by the perils
of the oca after the of September, 1843 he limy re-
tired for a fsw minutes, and returned with ten ..tr:scr in
favour of the plaintiffs to all the questions but the thin!, to
' which interrogatory they replied that there was no evidence
1.• er.ohfc it r w to uive an opinion upon the point.—lhe jur
thin found a verdict for the plaintiffs for the amount claimed
—4021.1Je. 2d.