The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1807-01-31
STEPHEN DUTILH
In the fupreme court
of the fate OF PenBfyl-
vania, Philadelphia, ia
SAMUEL GATLIFF.

vana, Philadelphia, ia
SAMUEL GATLrFF. nuary II, 1907.
HPira for the opinion efibe court.
On the 24th September, 1893, the defendant
samuel GdtHH' underworld feven hundred aud
nifty dollars upon policy of endurance on the
ichooner Little Will, belonging to John Du-
TIN and Thomas Lillibridge, for whom the
piaint,h was agent, on voyage at and from
Philadelphia to Havana (prout policy.)
On the s5th of September, 1899, the Little
VIII failed on her voyage from Philadelphia for
HAVANA, and on the 9Th day of October fol.
lowing HE was captured by three Brtifh priva.
teers and carried into the port of Naffau, New
Providence, where ihe arrived on the thirteenth
OF the fame month.
Upon her arrival in NafTau the faid fchooner
was ibelled in the admiralty court and on the
GIN day OF November following was regularly
acquitted; and in the whole fhe remained tbir
ty-ieven days at NaGau, during thirty.fvc Of
which The was in cufody of the captors; but
the tact of her acquittal was not known TO the
plaintiff until after the abandonment hereafter
mentioned: although it was known to Iohn
Dutih' one oil the owaers and fupercargo, who
| was with her at NafIau.
On the thirteenth day of November, the
plaintiff wrote the letter of abandonment ,n-
clohng the papers therein referred to, (prout
ietter) which was received by the defendant
the fame day.
'ne Soth NOV the ldiQ lchr. tailed from
Ndiiau tor Havana, where fhe arrived ON the
2lit of the fame month, and fold her caroo.
except three boxes plundered at New-Provi-
oence. Afterwards the faid fchr. failed from
HAVANA for Philadelphia, where fi,e arrived on
the 26tn or 9th OF February, in the year 1890.
with cargo Of fugars, on which freight became
due and was received by Stephen Dutllh for
tue cement OF thoie VINO were entitled 70 it,
each party refufug to accept her, re was fold
md kl,o IL.
applied to the payment thereof.
The fchr. Little Will was American proper
ty as warranted
ne quettion for the court is, whether the
piaintIt is entitled to recover as for total ofs
Al the court hall be of opinion that the LOLA
was total then it fhal be referred in The pfual
form to three perions to be appointed by the
cOert 10 alcertaln what is due after the legal
| and jua deduction.
IT the court flall be of opinion it was not TO-
tai lois, it ihal in like manner be referred 10
three referees or any two Of them to be ap-
pointed by the court to afcertain the partial
lois to which the defendant is liable.
J. INGERSCLL,
for the plaintiff.
w. LEWIS.
for the Defendsnt.
Opinion Of tie toart deiiUe, Ell By II. 7HsEmas,
e.. j.
On the cafe thus hated the quenion fub-
united to the court is, whether the plaintiff is
entitled to recover for total lois /.
In reiolving this queton Ghall divide it into
two points.
]. Did there ever exit total lofs2
2. Suppohog that here once exifted total
lois, has any cirCumnance occurred Which ex-
cludes the plaintiff from recovering for more
! than a partial lois!
1. The cafe before US includes one Of the
| riks expressly mentioned in the policy, a fHk-
ing at Jea' But 1t has been objeded that this
taking was not by an enemy, and that when
beIllgerent takes a neutral, Il is to be prelum.
ed that the tdkli & is only for the purpofs of
tearching for the property of his enemy, or
goods contraband OF war, aud that 10 the end,
juttiee will be dose to the neutral. To Ger