The Express.
London, England, 1860-06-28 00:00:00

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.—Juss 27.

Battings at Nisi Piing, at Guildhall.—(Before Mr.
Baron Martin and a Special Jury.)

RICH V. THE ROYAL

COILPLIT.

Thu was an action to recover the value of a Are policy.
The defendants pleaded, first, that the policy was obtained
by a fraudulent representation ; and, secondly, that they
had
.alOl. into court, which the plaintiff had taken out
a. *on for his claim.
Mr. Joyce was counsel for the plaintiff ; Mr. Lush, Q.C.,
and Mr. Kingdom, were conned for the defendants.
It appeared from the plaintiff's evidence that he is a
Pole front Russ-Poland, and a tailor by business. In March,
1868, he was sallying on business as a cigar and tobacco
dealer, and also a dealer in " piece' goods, tailors' trim-
mings, &c., at Etham-plane, Kelst•treet, Borough. He
called upon one of the defendant's agents in the City.smd,
and made a propoaal for insuring his stock and furniture in
the sum of 3001. The proposal was accepted, but no policy
was issued.

Mr. Lush and Mr. Joyce said it had been agreedbetween
them to try the case, subject to the terms of the policy, as
if the policy had been issued.
Plaintiff continued—On Friday evening, the 23rd April,
he shut up his shop as usual, left the gimlet burning, and
went to see his young lady. (Laughter.) His sister and
niece were left in charge of the house. He returned about
half-past 11 o'clock, when he found there had been a fire
upon the premises, and the house was in the possession of
the firemen. On the following morning he went over the
premises, and found that almost everything had been de-
stroyed. He sent in his claim for 321/. lc 6d. The next
intimation he received was to attend an inquest, which was
afterwards countermanded.

The Judge—ls it a practice to hold inquests on fine!
➢fr. Joyce said Mr. Serjeant Payne had been in the habit
of holding baguets on fires in the City of London and
borough of Southwark, of which he was coroner. This oc-
curred before the recent decision in the Court of gnore's
Bench.

erces-examined—He had been in England about eight
years. He had never gone by the name of lfauritsy. He
had always gone by the name of Rich since be had been in
England. He knew a person named Bennett. a Polish Jew.
He did not know if his other name was "Rernanowitzky."
(Lighter.)

JoyOe—lt is a great mercy that they do change their
names when they come here. (Laughter.)
Plaintiff continued—He had done business with Bennett.
He believed he bad had an accident by fire. He purchased
some goods of Bennett when he commenced business. He
succeeded Bennett after he left Iltylor's-oottrt. He made
the following proposal :—For cigars, pipes, and tobacco,
$Ol. ; stationery, 30/. ; pieces, &c., 1001. ; trimminp,
rox. ; fistures, 301. ; and household furniture, 100 f. He
did not remember applying to the Phtenix and being re-
fused. He referred to a man named Fennkenstein, who
gave his landlord a good character of him. He bad a fire on
his promisee shortly before that on plaintiff's promisee. He
came to plaintiffs house the night of his fire. He could
not say if his sister and niece were waiting to receive
Feenkenstein.

Several witnesses were called in support of the plain-
tiff's case,

The defence was that the plaintiff, by fraud and misre-
presentation, had induced the company's agent to accept his
proposal alter he had been refused by other oaks', and
that before the company's surveyor could visit the promisee
in the due course of his rounds the fire took place. It was
furthsr contended that the plaintiff had not the stock and
furniture he repreeented, in proof of which it was stated
that the plaintiff had taken 10/. out of court, the amount
paid in as the salvage. The fire was very slight, and but
little damage was done except to the stork.
A number of witnesses MINI called for the defence, sad
the jury ultimately returned a verdict fur the defendants.