Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-08-27 00:00:00

that the plaintiff claim&

shop, and also th
their value.

Ve diet for the plaintiff
_ _

CLAIM AC

.NST A SIIIPOVVI,IVIL.-- -MAJOR V. LAW

AND OIIIE

The plaintiff was formerlyaihiplmilder, but in 1858
became bankrupt ; the defendants • are shipowners in
Glasgow. The action was brought to recover the sum
of £ll2 Bs. 4d., the balance of an,aecount for materials,
labour, and services require& for stuTdry repairs and
alterations done to the defeatlants' , ship, called the
Black Eagle. The vessel was purchased by the de-
fendants about February, 1859, And. the , plaintiff was
) superintend the repairs. One portion

employed
of the t

ulcerations maim was

extraordinary character

the main mas
resorting to ti

:eet, without

ity of taking di

to, eat. oir the por-

and then to lower 4he •,whole ;into-the
by means of screws. :It ..was alleged

that thi; plan h.ad effected a considerable saving of-ex-
pense to the owners of the ship, wad that it, was the
first time it had been resorted to.

After the case had been partially hesird,' it. wasagreed
to take a verdict for the plaintiff, subjectto a.reference,
The court rose a few minutes after si.o.'clock.

CST I

HITS COURT.--YESTERDAY.
['Before Mr. JUSTICE HILL and a Spedial Jury-.]
A. .DISPUTED POLICof OF INSURANCE,---GARUNER
AND 'OTHERS V. THE CATALAN GENERAL INSURANCE
COMPANY.—This was an action on a policycof insurance
for £B6O, upon the freight of the ship Blorenge. The
defendants pleaded that the policy was ckbtaincd by
a fraudulent concealment of facts. They had,paid £24
into cella, and further pleaded that the plAitttiffs had
been compensated by another policy, with the ‘exception
of £5OO.
Mr. Jaw(

plaintiffs,
defenclav

, and Mr. Melhniah anpeareil.for the
Wilde, Q.C., and Mr. Spinkis,efor. the

It was stated, on the part of the plaintiff, that iu the
month of February, 1858, the vessel was on a Toyage
to San Bias, and in the same month the plaintits, -as
owners of the Blorenge, executed a charter-party with
a firm at Mazatlan. When the vessel arrived at fran
Bias she discharged her cargo, and immediately after-

fazatlad to take in a fresh ca

She arrived 1 that part on the 30th of May

signalled for Z. pilot. No pilot answered her sigma,
and she took up, her station about the length of a cable
and a half from the shore, in close proximity to her
Majesty's ship, The Alarm. On the following day a
pilot came on board, and he informed the captain that
he had anchored in a proper place. With this under-
standing the crew Jook in a great proportion of the
cargo ; but on the night of the 11th of June, whilst it was
quite dark, they suddenly found, to their great surprise,
that the ship's bottom had touched the ground. Every
effort was made for the purpose of getting the vessel
off; all hands were called on deck, and every method
usual in such cases adopted ; but the efforts of the crew
and officers were unavailing, and the ship ultimately
became a total wreck. st.was subsequently ascertained
that the stock of the anchor was broken, and it ,was
clear that it was in consequence of that mishap that
the vessel had drifted towards the shore. The defend-
ants now pleaded that at the time the insurance was
effected the plaintiff knew that the vessel was lost, but
that they had fraudulently kept ;tbe information from
the defendants. A letter written by the captain from
Mazatlan, on the Ist of June, and received by the plain-
tiffs on the Ist of August, was the first intimation that
the plaintiffs had of the vessel, and upon the receipt of
it they waited upen Mr. Deakin, the insurance agent at
Liverpool. After corresponding with the principal in
London, he waited on Mr. Gardner, ,on the 6th of
August, and said an offer might be taken for 55 per cent.,
but he could not promise anythingc, less than 60 would
be taken. Under the instructions of Mr. Gardner, Mr.
Deakin, on the Bth of August, effected two insurances,
One at 555. for £2OO, and another for £BOO at 60s, At
this time the plaintiffs were not aware of the loss of the
vessel.
from , On the 9th of August, at Lloyd's, an extract
irina letter from their agent at San Blas was posted,
plaintiffs said of the wreck of the Blorenge; but the
following (rd. they did not hear of the loss until the
pool Exchaargwhen the news was posted in the Liver-
part of thei;iaintif)B Witnesses having been called on the
Mr. Wild,
question was whether, behalf of the defendants, said the
assured and the underiwill the connection between the
riters the latter had been justly,
honourably, and fairly . dealt with, as the dates were
excite suspicion
much calculated to
show that there was ample time for tile inossetowloiauvlde been
o
communicated to the plaintiffs before the '
d before the a
effected, letters having been received in insurance
Englandancewas
ofter_the loss of the vessel, _ written
pp tie ation for

instrrance,was made. It was shown that, on Febtwanty
'l7tla,iiho.plaintiff4:kriFew they had a cargo of Nicaraguan t
wvoitorguano ,cotniws by the vessel, but there was ,no
suggestion ,of a " general cargo," which was insured.
.tocoiclioglY Mat-A, a policy upon wood or guano with
the Equithble Insuw.nce Company was opened; and sil3Ge-
Irnently, although: the cargo and quality were known, and
when nothing laidtbtenbeard to lead the owners to increase

" in reply,'

double

bat.6.eir friends ha

they-Teceivededitditc

A lettcr•ha
pson, & Brool;

Iforming thE

is of the arrivc
that -the

his led to the inferer

pectin

it•wasmot,or_einnd they of
His Lordship said thk

.owing that the

the defendant
►ave said so.

mstances of s

t Cher

warranted `enquiry, uw. no proof of
fraudulent' concealmont imputed to the plaintiffs.
The jury retm-ned a verdict for the plaintiffs—date
£675.

CAL WORK

the plaintiff, Samuel Ball, chenist
grocer,

Sutton-

n-Wid

1,1111gv,,,?.1 . •
Hutchinson, .alkali manufacturer, for £
o ,ased by the dens,-='

nairatee
Wilde, '0

of chemical •rc
and Mr. Cole.

C., Mr. Monk,•

peered for -the- plaintiff ; and AI
Nlr. Milivrard for the defenda
stated that ,thes plaintiff, by real(

ty, Q.(

been intercepted b

lodation of the

to the injury of his

motor

d injury of the health .of
;nied in his pleas that the
use of the ditch or water-

Tried by pipes to land

tt one time, there

s inter-

t subsequently

itrthvi: