The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-01-22 00:00:00

BARROW V. BELL.

This was an action on a policy of insurance, effected on the ship
Latona, to recover cf the underwriters an average loss sustained by
the plaintiff in consequence of the vessel having been stranded at
Holyhead.
Alr. SCARLETT said, the facts of the cue were not disputed,
and the only question to be decided was, whether the circum-
stances under which the vessel and cargo had sustained injury did
or did not constitnte a stranding ? The facts were these. In No-
vember, 1022, the ship Latona sailed front Liverpool for Gibraltar.
A policy bad been efficted on the goods on board, with
a proviso, that it should be free from average, except by
stranding. When the ship was gone some way on her voyage,
site was forced by stress of weather into Holyhead harbour
in going into harbour, she struck against something, which
was subsequently found to be an anchor; but no injury was
then discovered, and the pilot having brought her to anchor, he
went on shore. The Captain, who remained on board, soon per.
ceived that she had sprung a leak, and upon examination he
found the water increasing rapidly. He then hastened on shore
for the pilot, on whose return to the vessel it was discovered that it
would be useless to use the pumps, as the leak was gaining on
them so much, that the ship wonld be inevitably lost if not
brought ashore; the passengers were aceord,ngly gut into the boats,
and went to land, and the ship was towed aground. It was then
found that a piece of her sheeting had been beaten off: She re-
mained in the harbour a fortnight ; but havnig been several times
very full of water, the goods were considerably damaged, and upon I
a calculation being made, the average loss was about 111. 3s.
per cent. The question was, whether this was a stranding or not P
It had been said, that at Lloyd's there was a very great differed's*
of opinion on the subject ; but to him, he must confess, there
could nut be the least doubt that it was a stranding, within the
meaning and spirit of the word. He remembered, many years
ago, he believed it was before his Lordship was called to the Bar
(and that reminded him too what an old age he was!arriving at), that
a very similar question occurred, which was tried three times before
three very intelligent Special Juries, by a person whom the
present Jury, no doubt, all remembered, he meant the
late Mr. Vawse. In that case the ship had struck
moon the rock, and the question was whether that was
a stranding ? It was at length decided that it was. He
took the law, therefore, as settled according to the custom of
merchants, that wherever the ship took to the shore by the perils of
the sea, she was stranded. But he was told, that in the cue men-
tioned by him, the ship was forced on shore ; whereas, in the pre.
sent case, she was drawn on shore by means of ropes and boats. He,
however, conceived, that it could make no difference whether the
ship was actually driven by wind and tide on the shore, or whether
by the perils of the sea there was no alternative left to the Captain,
but either to ran himself ashore, or be totally lost. He really
thought they were exactly similar in their results ; for, in both
instances. it was the perils of the sea that caused the stranding.
The question was, then, did the Captain bring the Latona on shore
voluntarily, without any adequate cause, and merely to suit his
own purposes, or did he do it from necessity ? Suppose the ship
had not been brought on shore, what would have been the conse.
quence ? Why then there would have been a total loss, instead of
a partial one. The Captain, therefore, was doing that which was
beneficial to the underwriters, by bringing the vessel on shore, and
had, by so doing, occasioned only a claim for average loss of
111. 3s. 6d. per cent. upon the underwriters, instead of 1001. per
sent., which they would have had to pay had there been a total loss,
as there inevitably would have been, had not the Captain adopted
the course he did. If his Lordship should think this a question of
law, he had no objection to consider it such, but he could not at
present conceive what could be urged by his Learned Friend, the
Attorney-General, in controversion of a point which appeared to
hint so indisputably clear.
The policy was then put in and read.
The pilot had been examined by the the attorneys on each side,
and his evidence taken in writing, which was agreed to be read, and
was read accordingly. He stated, that when he went on board, he
found the water increase from four feet to eight or nine feet in the
bold, and that it was alaulutely necessary to remove the ship, as she
was sinking.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL commenced his address to the
Jmy, but he had not proceeded far when
The Learned JUDOI asked whether it was not a fit question for
the Court above, on a special case ?
The ATTORNEY GENERAL said he thought so, and
Mr. SCA RLETT assenting, It was agreed that a case should be
prepared from the evidence of the. pilot, and argued before the
Judges in the Court of King's Bench in the approaching Term.
—soda
ARCHES COURT, FRIDAY, JAW. 21.