New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1864-01-01

survey VIII, bold ard Il ss found that she had
sustained to her bottom whi" on me rooi out
rot su i., to Justify sale by sAe nasirT at that exMnna
ton and on and extended ,ne bad oi that
Purpose very extensive Try rot All decay were
mad an sSandorinen 70 IL erwr;,er aud claimed to 70.
IN he pocsa for loss. on the ouna .n a. ne -,
xeihsr nscrs than Of e value Of the bark
The acon tried at the Richmond County GIcgn " no
yenber 1872 ard resulted In verdict for the plsinf@ fon
erpr. taken by the underwriters the Court General Term
81! Ido tbe verdict aud directed new trial The opinion Of
saosss b. the evidence In this ease that large portion
Of tho for making the repairs deemed nrce.
ry To be rade vessel In question sro'o nom injury oy
This expenditure was proper to o. incurred 20 pc'
:.swSIhy h.. ..sr, ne 70 e II s
disclosed not Ten Of expense TO S con
here a. not in my OPINION Sufficient proof to show thai
repair. we're caused or
qnence Of her touching on the c'fs rec! Vi rom v
weather om other penis nsored 'sain't On The SGn,y
he M rr,u OF III, evidence IT, that snch injury could nav
been replace her IN sape situation she wa.
In before without mourning any expense on scc'sn
This AZ hs psinS. could claim. The rae In reference
n the night Of abandonment: Of vessel stated to be TIM
,rs rsuIed against WI replace Ler IN the situation
she was before matter how unsound al the other par
can AK thai the boa, may BE- placed IN sfats quo The
no, obliged TO make good the deesyed and
within the ,ers insured ynst Of such ns,ure "a will MOI
Of repairs being placed on her 20 that ts decsyed sne
State Ina Co. Martin 40; Philips on in', p 49, sc
81. and cases; Phillips ss Maine, d. o. and Scott IT, b.
| ~, $780, .,
IN the ca before the expenses for repairs resulting rem
tho aury which tia vesi, Of the plaintiffs Sustained Nom
sead and In Consequence Of dry rot were DISTINCT
Tho Jury nevertheless so.'d 20 include tie expenses
tho l.r n determining the plcipf right Of abinden
pent. This said however ttst the er
Iens. Of he .I,sht-nins tho heel Of the with tina.
er,brac. III bs Surveyors report Of Oct ~, 6 WIS sui
teien the plainia' Tia. right irrespective Of the di
| sso by dry ,o.
T po.o. is un,ensb.e. TIE estimate OF that cIpenss
W.. in ru renee the ar the WORK AMI mater as
ber. ard Bsfevia and there evidence by witch
can be s.cesned ss the cost Of Il there wondbe The
innate OF the expenses referred In Lst r'rort may b. cor
there j. proof II tie fact snd d:ss not Afford
d, for ttcnnu The OF eu7 Other wok ny com
rson II tn, mode b.. aovabe and 4 bc assl'nd 'hn,
he Witnesses have tc ent cGts upon which TO eIress al
/ opini.u ~ - whr. The ost woul! BE-.
There therefore. legitimate oosb on winch the Jury
coa.d ret 10 rrlsr,u"c to tbs, qo. .tioD.
Another otoction 20 that position, ~ VOL as othe'e On
mich (, aid that the verdict b. su,.sncd is'st
o..br. IN view Of the several proro'i'ios submitted 20
TIE Jury 10 FAY which o them adopted by ,Dei 10 A'iv
ins st ;he conclu.on hey d. .
POI III. .rascs Gbov. expressed tho Judgment fns DE
r~v.rud anG o,died. Costs 20 sb.d' 'he er..h
n,,srs C.ah ard Hole and l.. X AaIsh Tor VI n'-as
M.s-rs Boob 5cutieg and Lord fo' TIE underwriters