New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1867-05-10
SUPREME COURT-GESERAL TERM-MAY 9.-Befors
Justices LEONARD. hCRAIIAM ana sNriII
AGES-INSIlIA NCE LAW.

J,mes s. Beams agt the Columbian Conpsny.
The defendants issued two policies of Marine !nsur-
ance in favor of 81 Barnes tie assgnor of the plaintiff
dated June H. 1882 nsurng the bark Cera' FOR one
year from 1862 for &C. 900 valuation for the
whole vessel Of $4,000 and the other nsfng the freight
Of the Cora" valued at $1,000 carried or not carried
for one wear fron June 90 1862 The freight policy
tanned a warranty not TO the Min Riyer In CHINA,
higher than tie anchorage below tho klmpal pass aud
the vessel policy warranty not TO use the Min RIVER al
on March %, 1862 the Cora sailed on voyage from
Shanghai to Ncwehwang, the Liam HO River; arrived
there unloaded. and Maya, 1863 sailed again. bound
ultimately for Shanghai bat with cargo Tor FOO CHOW
To. on the voyage TO- and again on the voyage from
Ncwchwang she sustained injury which produced the
loss sued for 1t admitted that she encountered no
further disaster The Cora eventually and long after
the loss reached Foo Chow Foo no actual injury re-
the Min River The wreck was sold Mt Foo Chow Foo.
and produced 1885 &c. deductng wljoh nom the IN
While the loss according to the rule ixed by the policy
fhe cost to repair less onethird, &c was sl5J3 2s.
cheaply than at any other Chinese port.
Il Vas admitted that the injuries sustained by the Corr
sustained at place common 70 Noyag9 10 49, 49,
from Newchwang frcm and TO any other place au hne
Min River at place over 800 niles d7 INV rom onss
whore the route to the Min River deYatcooh 'he roue
The POINT made by the defendants the trial was tina.
the intention to sail for the Min lFer Se'sr 'u leu
from all liability, though the loss happened Deote nas
Intention had been carried into effect
Tie Jury found for the plaintiffs for the amount ciamed
10y them. The question rising on l5 p en- y. W,sms.
mcncod for the prohibited port, though Tire injuries 90
cured before the point Of deviation was reached u sui
!
below in the negative The decision on the appeal 10 70
| served. 100.
Jolu f. Parsons for PLAINTIFF, respondeutS David Dud
| Icy Field for defendants, appellants
CHAMBERs-Beforo Mr. Justice SUTHERLAND
| THE MURPHY DIVORCE CASE-KAS VIE A oEPA-
RATE RIGHT IN HER HUSBANDS PROPERTY BE-
| TORE PROCURING 4 DIvoRCEf
Murphy agt Gross . -
This case has already been several times reported
/ III Murphy tic husband OF the pamt1s AID The de-
f,udlut In other suit resided with his wife AID ch
dren in a handsome house Tbirty-siN thst owned by
him. Two or three years ago, difficulty arose between
them and she commenced action for divorce Tor cru
ev lie made deed 10 the defendant IN this SUIT of the
! for the purchase money, and made arrdngcmcM ~
way OF lease to return II for bis wics use fer some
| months. He then left for California hls. Murphy
charges that lie away secretly and TINT the sale OF
mo House was merely colorado for the purpose OF pre-
venting her from obtaining alim0ny IN her SUIT Tor d.
| yorcc aud a proper maintenance for herself and her
cfltcn She therefore brings tina action 10 lave thA
CONVEYANCE annued or declared subject 70 her rights
An INJUNCTION restraining Gross from exercising acts OK
ownership over tue property vacated and nc pres
eut motion Il 20 settle issues for trlll by jny Inc oe-
PENDANT opposes the motion, arguing from the analogous
creditor action that size cannot maintain th3 pcsenl
action until she has obtained decree in the prcipal
action and even il she should obtain verdict cOuLd
enter no dement, The counsel for the painth argus
that the analogy entirely falls that the Wfs relations
to her band IRE entirely different from those OF cred
arises separation, TO separate spr Is staht
and absolute They cited the few cases bearing directly
| Oh the question in support Of their claim
| The Court reserved It's decision
| Mr. McKeon aud AIr. Eyarts for pla!at1. Nj Aexaa
| der for defendant.