Star.
London, England, 1817-11-20 00:00:00

•
f74-40gry
ti:;*111110.94/
•
• ,
• PRICE SEVEN-prim:P..
•
L ctlf INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF RING'S BENCH, NovEmcra
EVERITT V. TONNEAU.
This was a ease arising nut of an motion brought '
on a Policy of Insurance ro recover the value of a
ship and cargo, which had been insured at £8,600.-
The facts were these: —The Plaintiff. As agent for
some others, bad efft.ctei an insurance in the year ;
ISIS, on the ship and c trgo, at ;tail from Bourdeauz.
The vessel had come from Dantzic with grain to
London, and was chartered to go to Bourdeaux,
and from thence back to London. At. the time the
Plaintiff insured, he had given a warranty that the
vessel should sail with a French and English licence, •
and if not, that the insurance should be void. The
vessel sailed and arrived safe at Bnui -*dile on the
17th of March. 1813, and retaained at anchor in the
possession of the Captain unit the 25th of April fol.
lowing. when she was taken possession of by the '1
French Marine. and all her crew sent on sliore.— •
Her rigging was also taken down, and she moored
under the walls of the Castle. It appeared on the
trial, that soon after her arrival, her license had been
taken from the Captain, and sent up to Paris, as
usual on such occasions. She remsined in Bout:-
deaux from that time until two days btfore the Al-
lied Army took possession of the S•iuth of France.
when she was restored to the Captain. As soon AS.
an account of the seizure had reached the insuring
he abandoned her, and subsequently brought
his action on the Policy, to recover the amount ion
cured. This was defended, on the ground that de.
fendant was not bound to pay it, the plaintiff not
having fulfilled his warrinty of having a regular
French as. well as English licence. Tt.e case was •
tried, and a verdict entered. for the plaintiff, subject
to the opinion of the Court of King's Bench on the.
question—whether a vessel being insured at and from
a p.rticular port, arriving safe at that port, and be-
ing safely there for any length of time. the risk of
the party insuring did not then commence, and be,
'Of course, become liable to any subsequent loss?
Mr. TADDY now appeared in support of the yes.
diet. and contended that the vessel being inured at
and from Bourdeaux, and having arrived safely there,
pounded with the necessary liceoses, the insurers
were bound to pay all the risks she might incur after.
He observed, that it the vessel had only remained at
Bourdeaux for six hours in safety, the insurers would
still be liable, but the fact was, the vessel had lain
in the river at Bourdeauz from the 17th of March to
the 25th of April following, in- perfect safety. Her
papers, it was true, had been taken from her and seat
up to Paris. but that was usual with all vessels un-
der 'bailer circumstances. It had been invariably
held, and he cited several cases to prove it, that •
where the risk once commenced, any thing occurring
aiterwards which- may deteriorate the Policy, Could •
not render it void on the whole adventure. and there-
fore that the plaintiff must either recover the whole
of the amount or nothing.
Mr. Geastex, for the defendant, contended, that
the plaintiff had not kept his warranty of having a
regular French and English license, c, edition on
which he got the policy of insurance was not com-
plied with, and therefore the risk of the vessel and
cargo, whatever it was, became all his own.
Lord Ewomonounzi—u.The Court is only called
upon here to say, that one is not two. It is manifest
that any other voyage than that from Dantzic to •
London was not contemplated by the license."... •
The other Judges concurred with his Lordship,
and judgment was entered for the defendant.
Sewn JURY Counr.—A case of great importance. '
to o.•rsons arrested in Secitland,on what is there termed
a warrant is terrlitatiose fuze, was lately tried in the
New Jury Court at Edinburgh. It wine front the
detention of the American ship Perseverance. in the
River Clyde, and the arrestond imprisoninent of the
Captain of that ship, on a warrant obtained by the de-
fendant, Thomson, on which the Plaintiff was caw
pelled to give securities for his appearance, and for
his remaining in Scotland •during the dependence of
suits which were instituted, or which might be in-
stituted against him. The action was originally
brought by Captain Ccatax, of the American' skip,
before the Second Division of Ate Court of Session,
who in she course of the proceedings directed an
Issue to be tried before a Jury, to ascertain, what
damages were due to the plaintiff, Clark, in sukh de-
tention extending to the period of Sve.years and a
half, and for the proceedings that took piece in the
different Courts of Law, in convertive thereof,
the Plaintiff having obtained a judgment so,. his
Ifavolr, on an appeal to the House of Lords.—.
After a very long triat,•in wide° a great number of
witnesses were examined. the Jury gave' verdict far
the Waintiffs, with exemplary damages.
case floe different kinds of damaLe were cobSidered
'arid assessed by the !tar, the Lord Chief "Commie
stoner haring suerned up on each. -The Jury found .
defendant liable to the plaintiff at the rate of 4600
per annum, for the detention of We ship, as she !moths. r.
that might have been matte during the period of such,
detention—and also found him itable in the further
sum of 81000. oa account of the ilstentit'a and im: -
pristine:neat et the plaintiff's person, with 8344, for his,
law expenses, and other items, amounting idwhole to
the sum of 46,563 19's. Id. fur which a verdict was ,
certified and repined to the Court of Session. which
decided the case after a litiga;twenfoleat sewvienrgal:..mattars.i.t.e4r.
. -
The past summer has been productive of many r
singular deviations from nature. but we have heard
of none more singular than h
LOWILEt of 'has a jafgoactipt.U;lfer., which,
in due season, produced a cr,r, of fuse ittrit.i
wards bloomed again and prudoceal seeder crop of
fruit, which, though nut equal 'to the lieu, was very I;
fine; and the same tree is now in bialio4l4 tar the
third time ! • • -