The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1850-11-13


NovsabEn i2-In the case Of la p. Ecans IS. ne
Protection IasDsnes Co@pa"y, the counsel on both
TIE Judge S,roceeded TO charge the jury Upon the
iaw II he ease, be remarked agree that the fac
toriEiDe suits did not susfepd the cause Of action
against the pspy and tnAt those proceedings at
time operated a. bar consequently plaintiff mi fht
have susd Immediately after tue aotoa due under
the policy THIS defenss Is available on the
ground Of waiver that IL the fair legal inference
from the facts stated by Mr. Cbd from the Interview
in Oh. sumner OF 1875 between MAY aod ssptenoer
After talking over, aud differing to the amount and
failing to agree, aud when liquidation could not be
made both sgreed that the company could not be
PEELED to pay till the fsetorizng suits settled
IL they agreed the amount; and they further
sgeed thai sf.r the fsotorz'ns suits wer. removed
The sfs CT OF this operated ss waiver Of this short
bar. virtually promise by the compsny that they
would bona nd, attempt To Uluid,ts aud settle when
the factorziDg suits removed. AFTER revis OF
the testimony 81 the situeaes the Judge said:
easonsd by tn. FIRE. They had the testi nony Of Hay
ward and mis- clerk mpstent witnesses ana their
testimony the plaintiff wholly or nearly relies to
make out the amount Of his loss. These Witnesses
state that after the occurred thsy both proceeded
70 mate inventory Of the articles destroyed and
an account Of the value lost exceeding the amount Of
insursnce and hat view they claim that they
entitled 10 the whole amount insured These wit
nesses also state that they had other Of as
csrtsniDg an sccurats account than their recollec
tion they had no memorandum, bat they made up
the inventory from their recollectn On the part Of
the DEFENDANTS 1t injected that this inventory, made
up uhder thes. circunstsnces OF the mere reoollec
items OF various descriptions Of property involves
eme uncertainty. and should be taken by ths jury
the aetns loss with considerable slo aud qua
nhcsions and that the jury should look ioto Il With
care and tome suspicion before they would come 60
ne conclusion that the account thus made up
liable. The Judge here referred to the evidence OF
the books iedgss se. Itis admitted, on all sides.
that those books the ledgsrs particularly contain an
secosnt OF all the merch-ndi.e purchased BY the in
cured from the time Of the down 70 the tims
OF TIE FIRE Upon that IL founded the conclusion that
the witness has stated lie has taken the agursrate
amount OF the merohs ndise Ia th,t book Putt,n4
out the articles that eluded Ia the policy
he sfcertsins the amount aud debts that account
with goods not apparently connected with merchan.
disc, and in striking balsnce, nnds an amount
of two hundred and some odd dollars IL Ia oh
yious that this balance would not afford apv In.
terence sny well founded inference that that amonnt
vas the value Of all the goods In tue ct the time
of the d for this resson-thst the amount sales
embraced the profits that realized on the books
The exact II stated by the bookkeeper TO be
sa212 ca This II the amount at 10 per cent proht
ON the part Of the plsnt u Is stated that there was
proht Of 20 10 100 per cent OF the articles
psrtcuIsry on the liquors The question Ia undou bt
sdlv involved In obscurity, and the result must
depsnd upon the sound aud careful ia Of
the Jury on this particular point. On the one hand
they have inventory Of the goods that n the
store on the other they have the amount stated on
the rule Of proets but neither be perfectly relis
BILE.
Ted the 10 the hands Of the jury Who In short
fime brought IN verdict for plaintiff Uaciudins Ia
fArsst SA 02D 90.