The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1876-06-01
AnTnsnrance Case. |,

ana OQHEHy .CoHtPo"S O"'1 oe
/ & Waite. II; ~ q ~ q i ~ 8 n
| woodward e. Sherwood were the agents
OF the defendant at jersey City, Win au-
thority !" to take fire risks, Fix rates OF pre-
MUM, receive moneys, counterslgn issue,
renew and grant leave to transfer pohcles OF
insurance, signed by the president ana sec
rotary OF the company, and TO transnet Inc
business OF insurance in accordance with the
rules and regulations OF the company, ana
such instructions rs might from time TO
time be given them by the officers thereof.D
The plaintiff employed firm OF insurance
brokers in New York to place a large
amount OF insurance for him upon, ms
g frame building, known as Congress Hall,
!, =" in the village of Sharon Spa, n. T."
These brokers placed one thousand dollars
with the defendant, and received from
woodward & Sherwood, as its agents, po-
licy for that amount, dated June 2, 1915.
The policy did not acknowledge the receipt
of the premium and contained conditions
as follows:
"This company shall not be liable by VIZ
! tue OF this policy, or any renewal Thereon,
until the premium thereof shall be actually
paid "
"The use OF general terms, or anything
less than a distinct specific agreement, clearly
expressed and endorsed on the policy, shall
not BIO construed as waiver OF any printed
or written condition or restriction therein.
"The insurance may also be terminated
at any time, at the option OF the company,
on giving notice to that effect and ref1ndlng
ratable proportion OF the premium Tor
the uneXpired term Of the policy"
When the policy was delivered to the
brokers they were charged on the books OF
y n 1,n
the premium, less their commission OF
fifteen Der cent. as brokers, and they ere
dited that firm with the same amount on
their own books Woodward & Sherwood
also at the same time credited the company
with the premium.
Soon after receiving the policy the brokers
delivered it to Bang, charging him on their
books with the premium. 1t is the custom
OF insurance agents to transact their busl-
ness with brokers in good credit in this
way. This practice had prevailed between
Woodward d. Sherwood and this firm OF
brokers for more than year previous to
this transaction. Statements were rendered
the brokers monthly, showing each premium
unpaid. As payments were from time to
time made they were so entered on the books
as to show the particular premium they
were intended to meet.
Monthly statements were also made by
Woodward & Sherwood to the company
showing the risks taken and the premiums
collected as we'll as those uncollccted. Re
mittanceS were made in such manner as to
indicate the particular premiums paid The
agents were charged on the books OF the
company with the premiums upon all risks
taken. Whenever Il policy was cancelled
for non-payment of premium, as was some
times done, the charge against the agents for
the premium on that policy was balanced by
q corresponding credit. The company had
ample means of ascertaining from month to
month what premiums were paid upon the
outstanding risks and what We're unpaid.
II also appears from the testimony OF the
president of the company that the general
course OF business between the agents and
the brokers, as we'll as their customers, was
understood at the home office, and no oblec-
ton was ever made.
In August Bang paid his brokers on ac-
count $3.50, and this amount was placed, TO
his credit without applying it to the dis-
charge OF any particular premium. This
was sufficient to pay in full all premiums on
all the policies obtained up to and including
that of the defendant, but left consldera-
BILE sum due on the general account, when
included premiums upon large number OF
policies obtained after that had been issued.
The premium on the defendants policy was
never paid by the brokers to Woodward &
Sherwood. and they reported it to the com.
pany in all their monthly reports as unpaid
and the risk uncancclled. Several times
during the summer Woodward Il Sherwood
called the attention Of the brokers 10 the
fact that there had been unusual delay IN
the payment, and intimated that unless II
was soon provided for they would be com
pcllcd to give notice Of cancellation OF the
nolicy on that account. The brokers recog-
nizcd the fact OF the delay, and promised tt
give it attention at once, but no steps were
taken to cancel the policy, neither was the
charge for the premium marked off in any
OF the accounts.
Things remained in this condition untl
September /, 1875, when the property IN
sllred was destroyed by fire. Within a few
DAYS after the brokers rendered the premium
70 Woodward g. Sherwood, but they, under
instructions from the company, refused to
accept it.
The share of the loss payable by the de-
PENDANT, and which is not disputed, II any
liability exists, is S7G3.13.
Some questions were raised upon the trial
as to notice and proofs of loss, but the tesrl-
mony shows clearly that prompt notice was
given Immediately after the fire, and that, as
soon rs the adjustment was completed,
proofs were furnished showing the amount
OF the entire loss, the amount OF the whole
insurance, and the percentage to be paid
upon each policy. Copies OF the written
portions Of the several policies other than
that of the defendant were not given, but no
objection was made at the time on that ac-
count, the company rejecting the claim on
the sole ground that the premium had not
been paid. 1t is now too late to make this
objection. Us. The Exchange Mutual
Insurance Company, y Gray, 265.
It was also objected at the trial that there
was such generalization OF the property 1or
the purposes OF insurance rs rendered the
policy void. The proof fails to sustain this
defence.
The only other question presented by the
Headings or upon the trial is as to the effect
OF the non-payment Of the premium upon
the liability of the defendant. There Is no
doubt that Woodward d. Sherwood had
mower to give credit upon the premium and
to waive that condition OF the policy which
required its payment before the liability OF
the company should attach. This was not
denied at the trial. They were the agents
OF the defendant to transact generally its
business of insurance at Jersey City, in ac-
cordance with the rules and regulations OF
the company; and these rules and reSula-
tons, it is agreed, provided for credit by
special arrangement. Neither can there be
any doubt that there was waiver Of the adj
vance payment in this case il it could be
done in any other manner than by an eX-
press agreement to that effect endorsed upon
80, n&nvSr llTy RI tfnY