The Sun.
London, England, 1825-11-01 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF BING'S BENCH, OCT. 31.
The four Judges of this Court sat to-day in the Middlesex
Sessions-house, for the purpose of hearing term business, but
rose at one, in consequence of the absence of the Counsel who
should have argued before them.—The LORD CHIEF Jus-
Isms, said that he thought the Court were bound to proceed
and give judgment if Counsel did not attend, unless their ab-
sence was caused by illness ; and gave notice, that to-morrow
the cases would be called on in their order and disposed, of,
unless some good reason was shown. The cases argued to-day
were all writs of error from the Common Pleas, of no general
interest, and in all the judgment given by the Court below was
affirmed.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, OCT. 31.
SHIP INSURANCE.—STRONG V. HARVEY.
This was an action instituted by the plaintiff, proprietor of
the brig 'Waterloo, for the recovery of the amount of an in-
surance policy from the defendant, a member of a private com-
pany of underwriters.—The general company being the 'real
object of the action, Harvey was, of course, merely a nominal
defendant.
Mr. PARE opened the pleadings.
Mr. Serjeant TADDY stated the case for the plaintiff.
The following appeared to be the main facts of the case as
set forth in-the course of the evidence ;
A private company of forty commercial gentlemen was formed
in the course of the preceding year, for the, purpose of insuring
vessels, on the principle that the general profits of the speculation
should be shared, and the losses of it suffered by every memberof
the Association ; each individual member gaining or losing in
proportion to the sum of his share. The capital subscribed to
support the Company's operations amounted to 70,0001. The
plaintiff, Strong, and the defendant, Harvey, are both subscrib-
ing members, the former to the amount of 60001. Early in the
year 1823 the plaintiffinsured a brig of his, the Waterloo, on the
laNks of the Company above-mentioned ; the term of the policy
was one year. The vessel sailed with a cargo from Jamaica to
Alicant, from that to Ireland, where she changed her lading ;
thence back to Jamaica again, and returning to England through
the Gulf of Florida, struck on the Tortagas rocks, on the coast
of Florida, at two o'clock in the morning. A Colombian pri-
vateer, the Santilla, aided by certain local pilots, called wreckers,
joined in relieving the ship's distress, lightened her lading, and
by unceasing exertions, succeeded in effecting her safety for the
time. After a few days' repose, in a natural harbour on that
coast, the brig proceeded to Savannah, under the protection and
by the aid of the Colombian privateer. Here the cargo was taken
out and deposited in the Government stores, and the vessel hove
down, examined, and repaired. In the interim, the Captain of
the Santilla instituted a suit in the Vice-Admiralty Court
the State (Georgia), for the recovery of salvage, against
the Captain (Partridge) and the owner of the vessel' (Strong)
who had sailed in her through all these voyages. The cause
was heard by the district Judge, who declared the value of the
brig and cargo to amount to 30,000 dollars, and decided that
the defendants in that suit, viz., the Captain and owner of the
Waterloo, should pay to the salvers, viz. the Captain and, crew
of the Santilla, and the crew of the wreckers, the sum of twelve
thousand dollars. The British Consul in Savannah considered
the salvage excessive, and advised the owner, Strong, to appeal
against it. Strong declined appealing, sold the cargo, purchased
a considerable part of it, returned to England, and claimed the
amount of his policy of insurance from the Associated Assem-
bly of forty. The Company refused payment, and asked him
where he got the money for which he bought up part of the
cargo, and, in brief, intimated their suspicion of fraud and
collusion between him and others, in the navigation of the
vessel, and the defence of the Admiralty suit in America—
This placed the parties in direct issue, and private arbitration
being rejected, nothing remained but an appeal to open and
hostile litigation. A commission was granted by the Court of
Exchequer to take the depositions of witnesses, and procure
copies of the necessary documents in America. The Commis%
sion set out, performed their duty, returned and supplied the
litigants with materials for a Nisi Prius action at Guildhall
yesterday. The plaintiff supported his claim for the policy, by
evidence setting forth the circumstances of the ship's distress,
the necessity of her sailing to Savannah for repairs, the impe-
rative decree of the Georgian Admiralty relative to the salvage,
and the consequent sale of the cargo on disadvantageous con-
ditions.
Serjeant VAUGHAN, with whom was Serjeant Wilde ad-
dressed the Jury for defendant. Much documentary and oral
evidence was adduced to prove that the owner might have taken
the brig more safely and easily to New Providence ; that he
might have conducted the Admiralty suit about the salvage
more advantageously for the underwriters; that he might have
sold the cargo at a better rate; and, finally, that he had for
fraudulent purposes taken the brig to Savannah, misconducted
the Admirally suit, anti effecttxl a low sale of the cargo with
the object of purchasing it back for himself at an excessive
profit. The voluminous evidence on both sides having been
closed,
Mr. Serjeant TADDY replied.
his Lordship summed up the heads of the evidence, directed
the Jury to find a verdict for the plaintiff generally, but di-
rected their attention to two points on which he requested their
finding, viz. whether the conduct of the plaintiff was fair in
taking the ship to Savannah, or in causing the sale of the cargo ;
or whether it was fraudulent.
The Jury having consulted a few minutes in the box re-
quested leave to retire to their room ; and retired accordingly.
The Chief Justice waited for the verdict till half-past six,
and on adjourning the Court, directed his clerk to remain and
take the verdict.
The Jury returned at seven o'clock anti gave a verdict for
the plaintiff-. They considered the plaintiff's conduct fair in
going Savannah, but declared that he had acted fraudulently
in getting the decree on the salvage, in effecting the sale of the
goods, and in the subsequent transactions.
The case lasted from ten in the morning till half-past seven
at night ; it appeared to excite considerable interest among
commercial persons.