The Sun.
London, England, 1861-08-30 00:00:00

HARRISON V. JANSON.

This was an action on a policy of sea insurance,
brought against the underwriters to recover the
value as a total loss of the ship Indian Queen. The
defendants paid into court the sum equal to 36 per
cent. on the sum insured—from £4,000 to £5,000—
which they alleged was sufficient to put her in an
efficient state of repair.
Mr. Brett, Q.C., and Mr. Milward appeared for
the plaintiff; Mr. Edwd. James, Q.C., Mr. Mellish,
Q.C., and Mr, T. Jones for the defendant.

It appeared that the plaintiff was the owner of
the ship Indian Queen, which cost in 1853 £15,000.
She was repaired in 1853 at a cost of £5,700, and
was insured on a voyage out to Valparaiso last year
in the sum of £12,000 ; her value was said to be then
£4,725. On her voyage out, on the Ist of last April,
while'sailing 12 knots an hour, at night, she en-
countered an iceberg, and was greatly damaged by
the collision, her masts and rigging going by the
board, her boats being broken, and many of her
crew and passengers killed ; and on arriving at Val-
paraiso it became necessary to repair her. It was
found that the repairs would cost from £5,000 to
£6,000, and as the ship, it was said, was only worth
£4,725, the owner elected to go against the under-
writers as for a total loss, and sell the ship for the
benefit of the underwriters. The ship was accord-
ingly sold by public auction for 10,000 dols. For
the defendant it was contended that the ship, when
repaired, would be worth 40,000 dole., and as the
cost of her repairs were estimated at only 29,000
dols., the plaintiff could not elect as for a total loss.
It was further contended that the repairs were over
estimated, and could have been done by contract at
Valparaiso for 23,000 or 24,000 dole. A great deal
of the evidence was taken under a commission, and
read in court, and anything more dreary at the end
of a most protracted assize cannot well be conceived.
The few counsel in court who remained looked jaded
and impatient, the court was half empty, and except
the parties and those actually engaged in the con-
duct of the cause no one in court appeared to have
the slightest interest in the matter.
His Lordship having summed up,
The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff for the
full amount claimed as for a total loss.

(Before Mr. Overend, Q.C., sitting as a Commis,
sioner, and a Special Jury.)

M`CANCE V. THE LONDON AND NORTH-WESTERN
RAILWAY COMPANY.

This was an action to recover the sum of £69 as

the amount of damage sustained by plaintiff in con-
sequence of the defendants having carried plaintiff's
horses, in July last, in defective trucks, from Liver-
pool to Wolverhampton, whereby they were injured.
Mr. C. Russell appeared for the plaintiff ; and
Mr. Manisty, Q C., and Mr. Quain for the defen-
dants.

It appeared that the plaintiff brought his horses
on the Bth of July, 1861, to the defendants' station
at Edge-hill. They were three in number, and late
in the evening they were put into a truck pointed
out by the company's servants, with four horses of
a man called Keatinge, who was travelling with
the plaintiff. The seven horses filled the truck so
as to prevent their jolting. After they had been
put into the truck Keatinge went into the com-
pany's office and paid the carriage, £2 19s. 6d. At
the same time he put his mark to a printed declara-
:,ion that the value did not exceed £lO each horse.
There was a difference between the evidence of the
plaintiff and that for the defendants, as to whether
the contract was read over or explained to the plain-
tiff. At the time this ?tinted form was signed the
plaintiff got his receipt, with general conditions of
carriage printed on it. When the train arrived
at Warrington it was discovered that the bottom of
the truck was broken and the wood rotten, and that
the legs of two of the horses had got through. One
of them was killed by defendant's orders, and the
others were considerably injured. The defendants
paid into court £25, which it was admitted covered
the loss, assuming the value of each horse to be
conclusively fixed at £lO. Assuming that the limit
was not £lO, the plaintiff's damage was admitted to
exceed £25.
The questions raised were—first, whether the
printed form was, in fact, an agreenient limiting the
terms of the contract to carry ; and, secondly, whe-
ther, if so, it was a reasonable one within the Rail-
way and Canal Traffic Act (17th and 18th Victoria
cap. 33, sec. 7), so as to bind the parties.
A verdict was entered for the plaintiffs for £4O
in excess of the £25 paid into cowl-, with liberty to
the defendants to move the superior court as to the
question of law.
It is expected that the few remaining causes will
be got through in the course of to-morrow, as, one
by one, the parties, tired out with waiting, are be
ginning to settle.

AUGUST 29.

(Before Mr. Baronlkartin and a Sdeeial Jury.)

MORGAN V. SMITH.

This was an action to recover damages for carry-
ing the plaintiff in defendant's ship to New Orleans
against the will of the plaintiff.
Mr. Edward James, Q.O , and Mr. Milward ap-
peared for the plaintiff; and Mr. Mellish, Q.C., and
Mr. Deighton for the defendant.
The plaintiff was a Channel pilot employed to
pilot defendant's ship, the Rockland down Channel
in the mouth of February last, and instead of put-
ting the plaintiff, after his task was done, on board
an Inward-bound ship, or on shore, he was taken on
to New Orleins. The nature of the contract entered
into with pilots in such cases was at first disputed,
but finally it was agreed that the contract was that
the captain of the outward-bound ship should use
reasonable exertions to land the pilot or put him on
board an inward-bound ship. The plaintiff alleged
that the defendant did not do this, but that, the ship
being short of water, she hurried on to New Orleans.
On the other side, it was stated that severe
easterly gales set in at the time, and that it was
impossible to land the pilot or put him on board an
inward-bound ship, and that all reasonable exer-
tions were made to do so. _ _ .

This question was left to the jury, and they at
once found a verdict for the plaintiff for LOO.

DUGGAN V. Tug MIDLAND RAILWAY COMPANY.
This was an action for giving the plaintiff into
custody and assaulting him.
Mr. James Q.C., and Mr. C. Russell, appeared