True American. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1835-18??, 1839-05-15

IMPORTANT DECISION TO STEAM Boar OWNERS
Supreme Conrt-[n the case Of Herman Briggs & Co.
vs. the Western Marine and Fire Insurance Company,
the Court decided
That where steamboats,, running the Mississippi
r'ver take ships in tow anil loss cnsues to the
bnaf, the insurers underwriters are not liable
when there is clause this effect in the policy ofn.
surance.
Eustis j. delivered the opinion Of the Court. This is
an action on policy ofinsurance on the steam boat
Fort Adams.> The insurance for six months from
'he date Of the policy aud the loss happened within that
time. The case was tried by the court below Without
the Intervention of jury. There was Judgment for
the plaintiffs for total loss, and the defendants ar
peuled.
The adventures end perils insured against by the
policy, are Of the river and fire, and all that have
shall come to the dtiment damage Of the said
boat, cngnc any par, thereof The insurers not
liable for dana the bouts machinery unless by
internal causes, or by fire.
By the memorandum, said boat is to have the ber-
y to navigate the Mississippi river aud such tributaries
suitable to her class."
The in which the loss is occurred is best ex-
planned in the words of the witnesses:
The testimony shows that the steam buat Fort Adams
took heavily laden brig in tow at Natchez, and was
proceeding with her, lnslrd alongside, her down.
ward trip, voyage, to New Orleans. The weather
was hosterous and stormy; the boat heavcd and Strain
ed very much, and coming Porr Hudson shoai
it was asceraincd she was Filling with water. She was
cut loose from the brig, shore and sunk in shall
low water. 1t vas also shown that her timbers were
sound aud the boat generally in good condition when
| she was raised and brought to New Orleans
The question submitted to Us, is whether under these
facts the insured can recover?
1t must be observed that there is nothing in the y Ii
cy which renders the insured liable for the aca of III.
captain Officers of the steamboat. Their liability or
the subject depends entirely on the law.
When the steamboat at Na:chez the captain tool
in brig, and when the loss occurred the brig " Al
dashed alongside Of the steamboat. The Witnesses al
of whom or have been engaged in the navigation
steamboats, on the river, state that It usual for
boats to take vessels in tow in their voyages up
down the river but have evidence to the ag.
| Of insurance in that cn'e; and not informed
whether such privilege is not stipulated in the pol
ices. The business Of towing ships is entirely separat
and distinct from all things connected with ncenta
the navc alton Of the river by steamboats, or The trans
portaton of freight and passengers; usage which
would throw this additional risk on insurers ut eas
ought to be proved to have been acquicsced in by tos
most affected by it. Louisiana Code, article B. If til
owners Of steamboats, wish to have the privilege Of tow
ing vessels let clause be inserted to that effect in tn
policies Of insurance. The towing n heavily laden shi
steamboat with her tiers of cotton OF deck necess,
ry mpedes her progress, and it is idle to say does
increase the risk of the bout
The meaning of the contract Of in urancc for the yo
age is ,hn the voyage shall be performed with all SAT
convenient and practicable expedition; and in the reg,
lar and customary track" The shorness of the tim
of The distance Of deviation, makes no difference
to its effect the contract. 5 keuts Commemorate
= PIP. 33.
On this principle the rule relates to an insurance {
- Time. The insured cannot subject the insurer to ris
u not assumed by his contract. We must have other
licences to such usage, before we can permit it
change the terms Of written contract and to subve
S what we consider elementary principle of the law
: insurance.
c The loss in this case WAS caused by the conduct
" the captain in proceeding his voyage with the br
e dashed alongside of their steamboat The condition
IN the weather such to have put any prudent m
+ his guard against attempting navigate the
II boat LOADED with cotton, with This ad~~".' '''o'
brance. What could have ..ir t'ian TO nave ca
is Of the brig thus saving the property and lives enru
ry ed his charge from this unnecessary danger for it
III in vain to contend that the additional weight of
vessel did not contribute to, if not directly produce
of disaster. Had the boat been perfectly Free there is
IL evidence which satisfies that she might not nc
a. proceeded OH ilr 'uy.eo susty II" Injury was dt
ot to the brig and to the steamboat by the force
ed the winds aud waves, other than that which
connected together in elt