, 1873-11-13
The Case Of Howell Against the Hart
:, ,''> ford Insurance Company
on Trial.
Decision Relative 10 tho Jurisdiction
OF thD District Court III
,..> j.. -, Admiralty. -, =,
Power Of jldgcs to Examine Debtors
Before Adjudging Them
:: -: Bankrupts. ~
The Republic Insurance Company As
signco Declared Legally Elected
md His Acts Valid.

signco Declared Legally Elected i.
md His Acts Valid.
Some More Tax.Fighters... Bankruptcy
Matters'..The Courts iii Brief.
Tho notorious caso Of NJ. Il. Howell, Jr.,
against the Hartford .Fire Insurance Company,
which WaB got for trial yesterday, wns at last
begun, aftor many adjonrnmcnts. The action is
on policy of insurance for e5, 600 on build
ing At Marsoillos which was burnt in Octobor.
1860, the defendants resisting the claim on tile
ground that Howell not tho insured promises on
fire to obtain tho insurance.
In the opening argument, h1r. storra, for the
plaintiff stated that Martin Howell first started
. manufactory, for the manufacture Of wall
papor. In New DrunBwiolz, New Jersey. This
was aftcrward put undor tho management Of. or
bought by, tho plaintin, who moved tho whole
establishment to MaraeilleH, and Immediately In
sured 1t for 500, 600 In various companies. While
Howell WAS absent in New Jeraey, md without
his knowledge, IS counsel claims, tho building
was entirely destroyed. Howell had great tifa-
Guilty In making out his proofs Of loss, tho
trouble. being aggravated by tho conduct of
tho defendant or its agents. Some timo
after the fire, tho plaintiH WAS Indicted
for arson ut Ottawa but honorab1y acquitted.
Mr.. storrB stated that the depositiona Of two
witnosses, Smith and Zieglor,-which go to provo
that Howell hired them to Arc the manufaotory
were admitted, but the Court warned tho jury
TINT they wore Of diareputab1e character, which
would be- amply proved On tho trial. Ho also
outlined tho character Of tho evidence, TINT 1t
would bo bitter and perhapa perHonal, involving
tho character, Of tho plaintiff or Of tho dofend-
ant. Plaintiff would also prove that tho valuc
Of tho property was largely in excoss Of tho in-
surance: ST.;
Tho defendants claimed that the property was
very old was brought out horo aud Bct up, but
not aet running, no friction or fire near them !;
ahut up aud put in charge of zieglor aa watch
man, while Howell went off,: After the fire. he
swore out warrant for the arrest OF ziogler on
the charge Of nraon. Mr.. Dexter also argued
TINT 1t was very strange tint Howell would put
such villains, as he oalls them, in charge OF bis
manufaetory. Mr. De1tor also statod that 1o
would show that Howell Ind conversa-
ton with one Smith, in which he hintod
TINT he was in a bad way and wanted to get out
Of it., and thought it was right to burn his man
ufactoty.; Tho tortuous conduct OF the plaintin
was offered to provo guilt, and guilty knowledge
OF tho circumstances Of the fire.
Counsel for plaintiff first offered the policy of
insurance and 4 doed Of the property to Howell.
The prooiR Of loss wore admitted to haro boon
properly made out and served OH tho Company,
Tho first WitncaH callo0 was Smith Q. Doebc,
who testified as to the character md valuo Of
000.
bIr. Kraft testified as to tho Value OF tho prop
orty, ind as to tho facts Of its being destroyed
hv f1to3ro In, IL
a prima faoie case.
Counsel for tho defendant before opening tho
case, made an objection to putting in evidence
tho policy without also putting in evidence the
the policy VAS to ba made part thereof, but tho
objection was overruled, the application boiug in
tito possession OF tue defendants tho Court
stating that ho would not control the plaintiff as
support hin claim. Tho sc1lcdules OF
the property were put in evidence, and
those Of 'insurnnce in the various companies.
The affidavit OF Maurice D. 6m4th, or Jockey"
afternoon. Smith in lis affidavit atates that
after ho became acquainted NTH Howell, lie ro-
eeived a note from, mid in answer to it took
ride IN AiB buggy. Howell asked If he wanted
objection. Howell then talked about fires, md
asked deponont II he wanted to take tho job Of
burning his factory. Smith said yes,, md tho
thing waR arranged whom thoy got to OTTAWA.
property, that he had two ,partioH, in with
him whom lie must /" sec whole," and he know
no other stops ho could take to- get out
Of 1t, but he must finish the thing first, and got
it going. He promised 81, 900 for burning it. to
be paid wlen he got his Insurance., Plaintiff
told Smith, rs ho alleges, that ho was to fire tho
building pour somo kerosene on the floors, pull
tho plug out Of the yarnish cask, and strew the
ahayings around. and then escape through tho
window Oh the first floor. uo WIS to start tho
next day after the conversation for tho East.
Tho rehtling Of the croBa-oxamination was bo-
gun, but not concluded, so tho statements Of
Mr. Smith must be taken with all due allowance
till the other side has been heard. Attached to
the cross.examination Of Smith ia q photograph
copy Of an affidavit mado by him before d JUS
tlce Of tho Poaco Of LaSalle County, in which ho
directly contradicts the testimony read yeater-
lay, stating that Howell mover lad any eonvor-
aation Will him about burning tho manufactory,
Tho defense will continue TO Introduce cyl
tonoe for day or two, tho deposition Of Zteglor
being next 10 ordor, to prove tho fraudulent
burning Of the nhred premises which g ;,, T1aid II
rcply with evidence to sho" that the Witnesses
Smith aud Zicgler ara unworthy Of crodit. The
tral will occupy aboutn week, as the summing
up OF the 1nhss Of evidence Will require nohrly
Dexter and Riapey Smith for tlle defendants.
DECISION Az 70 ADMIRALTY lVn!ePlorIof:
Judge B!olgott delivered Q deolaon relative to
tho Jurisdiction OF tho District Court III AaMFat-
ty which will be Of intcrest.
: About two wpola ago, Tllomaa Scott, the IL
holant filed his libel IN Admiralty sgsinst tho
Provincial Insurance Company Of Toronto.
Carada The lDol articles upon contract Of
insurance made by the libeant with tho re-
Rppplont at the port Of Chicago on the 7th Of
November, 1B72, upon the hull OF tho schooner
Wolianl. During tho life Of the policy the yes-
sol, 1t IL alleged, was lost,
The libel atatcs inter ala that tho defendant
is not = resident Of the United States, nor .
citizen thereof. nor is It within the territory OF
the United states OF OF thls District, Init was ut
lie tlmo Of making tile contract aud aiso Ut The
timo OF fling the libel, q corporation existing
iy yirtyo OF tho laws Of the Province Of Ontario
III lis . British poseessIons Of North
America; Tint tho defendant has assots within
this district, and pfays that tho3 may 10 attRchcd
to compel al, answor. Tic ritual process lBsued,
and tllo defendant appeared for tic aolo purpose
of blending to Tho iuElatiolion Of tbs Court. |