The Sun.
London, England, 1809-12-23 00:00:00

'145'7 Er P OiiT.

CO:RT Or I.C.ll',:G's•6l-;NCIT, DEC. 19.

TTINS;S. Ai' NISI TRIU,, si.Tpitz LORI) EILENBOROUGIii
AND A SPI.C/A I. • JURY.

ELLIOTT V. S:SII111.
TiliS Was an action to recover trom the defendant,
the aniouni of a policy ot insurance, which tie otii;lit
to have wade ont he ship- Mary. - •
The ATTOR N'EY- GENER AL stated, •that• the de-
ftodatit had , received Instruttious to effeot an in;
suronee on the ship Mary,; bound to Spain. She.
touched at the port of, reriol, and was setzed,by the.
Sex.iish atiieers. • Tee brother -of the defendant
received, the instruCtions, he residing in York:, to in•
sire the ship to the atuOunt of 2,6001. the 4c:fetid!.
residing at Leith, undeitoole to effect a policy for
10001. at :0 per cf-411.,„.e,ai1d- the revoainder was ef-
fected at Hull, and ace- he,accouni
_of the-
seizure-ot the vessel. The plaintiff apOliedlo the de-
feudant,w ho was the mere broker, for the policye this
he refused giving,, bat sent- a .pretended copy of it.
This tile Jury knew would not entitle, the plaintiff
to reover. • Oir the defendant's being pressedifor
the ovginal policy, he refu.sed, until -the premium
was paid, which was immediately acceded to;. but.
instead of receiving. one- policy, for 10001. the
plaintiff was sent thsee---Oile tor, *001: and.one for
3001. and the other. ho-. 2001.; iii that
,of 6001. the:
defendant's name was set torth as the insurer, quite
contrary to the copy origioal!y delivered. It
-also
appeared, that . instead. of their insuring' for general
risk, as the tostructio_ns Were given; they only spe-
cified for sea-risk, which did not oblige the insurers
to be answerable‘ for the hiss. under the present.
circumstances. -On a minute inspection of the
policies, it was found,- that the stamps on two of
them were dated long' subsequent _ to the time the
policies appeared, on,t he face of them,to be executed,
wlocii, -was, June-, 1802, and the two gawps were
‘aated as 'issued from the Stamp-office in August in
the same year. Under-these circumstances, Mr. At-
torney-General contended, that, the plaintiff ,was
112 entitled to a verdict ;it was necessary that such prac-
. tices•shonid be suppressed, otherwise the, fair broker
.could not exist. -. • - .
• Arthur Smith, the brother of the defendant, de-
posed,-that he sent the order to his brother to effect
the insurance for 10001. on the ship Mary for six
monthf, trom all
,risk. He the witness, received the
the order from Mr. Couteau,
- On his cross'-examinaiion by Mr. PArtfc, he said ;
he 'receiv,ed a copy of the pelicy, by tire return of
post, fr in. the defendant, which he immediately
transmitted to Mr. Couteau,, accompanied by a lat.,•
ter, via( tin. policy (I.d' !cut warrant to insure
agates all, risk-, as the • hers a.. .
Mr.- l'a.kre then said ,that uC understood the fact
to be, 111 at. tile defeficiaii•'s conntitig-house had
been robbed, and every 'doer taken ,ot:t et it;
- which °bilged. \the detendant i.o get new Hicies ;
and
be, very properly, would not,detraud the Stamp-
office; but-also got fresh stawps:
Lord Eeectiliont -UGH observed, he was of Opinion
that-be ought riot to look at any other policy; than
the-one whin purported to-b tit 1000 i.
Mr. Ceuteau depoSed, he gaye oreers to the last
witoesss• to effect the ditierent itiSnranCe.:, and the
/ first time he heard that the,i.;eltcy for theloo'ol. had
taken, place in a 'single policy, was-after he hid
preased:liis surp,ise at the stamp' on two of the po-
licies bearing a later.date tha) the eitecutieti of the
, hist:out:lents thetnseVcT.
• Lord'. ELLgtiaobouGH-7-`e Mr. ,PI{F.K., can you
she* or pi oduce any ot those perst'Ais whom you
allege to have signed the first policy ? It such a
thing did. exist; .surly they -might to be here;;
even.sliew us, by eroof, thot this robbery took place,
which you have been instructed to assert. The
story-, in. my mind, appearfF, too improbable; and
must doubt that the 'Single poliey for 10001. was
ever enetted ; if it was, there would not have been
occasion to pay for the stamps to the ()Cher pOlicies
as the Commissioners of they Stamp-Office, on au ap-."
_plication, by affidavit, that the- original policy was
' destroyed, would have rene'.ted it."
Mr. P A K----" My Lord, I a,DI withotit witnesses
froth Scotland."
His Lordship then direfted the Jury to find aver-
did for the.plaihtiff, which they accordingly did for
10001. and' interest. •