Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1894-05-24
DEAR LITIGATION.
VERDICT FOR THE PLAINTIFF lN~THE
INSURANCE CASE.
History OF Remarkable and Long
Drawn out Contest which Has Cost Sew
eraI Times the Amount Involved-The
End Not Yet-A Recess of Court.

defence in the insurance case.
In County Court Thursday Mr. Ballard
argued for the plaintiff in the Insurance.
case He had not finished his plea when
court adjourned for the day.
Mr. Ballard concluded his argument in
the insurance case at 2;30 O'Clock Friday
afternoon, after speaking nine and half
hours.
Judge Start Immediately began delivering
his charge to the jury, occupying about %
minutes.
After the counsel gave notice to the court
of the exceptions they wished noted to the
charge, the jury retired, it being then
o'clock. Judge Start instructed the jury
if they agreed to seal their verdict and re-
port the same at the opening of court at y
O'Clock Saturday, to which hour recess was
subsequently taken
The jury agreed and separated about
$50 o'clock
On the reassembling of County Court
Saturday morning the jury in the case of
Matthew Bingham executors VS. the Pie
nix Insurance company of Brooklyn, N. v,
reported a verdict of S2040 for the plaintiffs.
OF the ~ questions submitted to them by
the court, the jury answered II indi-
rectly in favor Of the plaintiff. The
other one 'was any of the personal property,
covered by this insurance policy, incumb-
cred by chattel mortgage to James Bing
ham at the time Of the fire." they answered
| in the affirmative which, since the defendant
claims if the property was thus incumbered
| it vitiated the whole policy of insurance,
was in favor of the defendant. Mr.. Bliss
Immediately gave notice to the court that
| the defence would move to have the verdict
set aside on the ground that it was against
the evidence, and also for new trial.
The following are the questions submitted
to the jury and answere. by them
/. Was the fire set by the insured or by his
procurement or approval Tor the purh9ise OF
| insurance No.
=. Was the insured guilty of any fraud or
| intentional false swearing respecting any
material matter in his preliminary proof. OF
3. Did the insured. when negotiating for this
| insurance, knowingly conceal any material
| fact as to the value of the property insured, or
! knowingly misreprCSent in any respect the
value of the property he took an insurance
1. Was any of the personal property, COW
| cred by this insurance policy. lncumbered by
| p chattel mortgage to james Bingham at the
| tlue of the fire I Yes.
& Do You find that Mrs. Whalen is party
| in interest in this cause: Yes
g. Did the insured comply with the. provis-
ions of his policy, in respect to submitting to
| an examination! Yes.
And if the jury found for the plaintiff to
recover Judge Start told them to answer the
following questions:
l. Was the 500 paid TO Mrs. Richards as a
| >. What sum have YOU includedJ in your YER
dict for loss of personal property? 500.
3. What sum have you Included in your YER
dict for loss of property that was inCumbcred
| by chattel mortgage to j ames Bingham SIS.
/. Did Bingham after the issuing of the pol
icy knowing and voluntarily, without the
| knowlcdge or consent of the defendant, make
any changes in any of the property, or its use
or occupation or its exposure to fire whereby
| the hazard was ncreasedE No.
>. What was the value of wood outside the
house which was destroyed by fire. $50.
HISTORY OF THE CASE.
The case is, in some respects, the most re-
markable one ever tried in Chittenden
County court. 1t brought by O. $.
Dodds and j. j. Enright, executors of the
estate of Matthew Bingham, deceased, and
was based ON an insurance policy placed by
Gen, T. $. Peck March 20, 1891, for $4,000.
Sl,O0 on the buildings and $1,000 on per
sona property. The fire occurred about
noon July IS, 1891. The buildings and
most of the personal property were totally
consumed. The farm descended to Mrs
Bingham through her father She was
first married to Mr. Bingham in 1872.
-Four years later she secured a divorce
from him and two weeks later re-
farm at the time of her re marriage. A few
years later she again applied for a divorce
This time he resisted her claim and the libel
was dismissed. In April. 1890. she again
brought bill for divorce and this Mr.. Bing-
ham did not oppose At the time of the fire
4 Mrs. Etiie Whalen was housekeeper for Mr.
Bingham. When Mrs. Bingham was d.
> vorced the last time she took away most of
, the household goods, that MI Bingham
had practically to refurnish the house. as
he claimed. She secured alimony in the
sum of 81 $50, and Mr. Bingham had the
policy made over to her as her interest might
Soon after the fire Mrs Richards tn,
divorced wife, through Daniel Roberts,
brought suit against the company upon thi.
, policy. The company settled with her,
paying her $500 Sept 81. 1892. Mr.. Hard
attorney for the company, testified that the
. payment Of this $500 was IA mere gratuitN
, or present to Mrs. Richards, because sh,
was poor and woman and not responsible
= for Mr.. Bingham alleged misconduct The
4 jury by special verdict found that this Sj0t
a was payment on the policy and not "A pres
ent, The plaintiffs claimed during the tria
, that the company put every obstacle in the
. way of Mr.. Bingham 5 making out his pre-
! limnary proofs of loss even declining t,
furnish a blank for this purpose Tw,
proofs of loss were made out anC
both introduced in evidence on trial
The company refused to settle the loss with
= Mr.. Bingham and he brought suit Feb %
1892. The company claimed, among othe
9 defences set up that the fire was set b,
: Bingham or by his procurement; that h
:, swore falsely in proofs of loss, both as t.
J. the value of the property and the article
J. claimed to have been burned; aud that thu
II proofs Of loss were imperfect and did no
" conform to the requirements Of the policy
h Mr.. Bingham died September 25, 1892
t with lock jaw. Mrs Whalen, being at tn
;, house at the time of the fire vas. considered
d by the executors as material witness T.
aid in proving the quantity and value o
a the household goods and provisions destroyed
r As has been announced in these columns sh
y is under indictment and it has bee
J expected that the case against her would b.
a tried at this term of court, Mr., Bingham
y made a will and left his property to her af
n ter the debts were paid. but his cstate ia in