The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1896-04-10

mated. or naturally expected TO occh''
In the absence Of notice 10 the ton-
pauy, and of any circumstance to put
Il upon enquiry. or have eNcitcd thc "p-
prehension of the most careful ana eau
tious. the wrong itself being not ohiy
unusual. but probably without precedent.
10 would De harsh and oppressive to I'M
pose a liability upon the carrier.
MANDANfUs.
Collins. etc. vs.. Christian. Judge. Pc
tition Tor mandamus. Mandamus award
od Opinion 10y Cardwell. Judge.
Application FOR mandamus TO compel
judge of AppOmattOX County court 10
sign two bills Of exceptions. Mandamus
n.si issued and return by respondent.
Held: I. This court has jurisdiction 10
compd inferior courts 20 sign and seal
bills Of exceptions. or 10 amend such
bills according TO the truth Of the case.
80 Graft, llj. High on LNtraoIuiHaiy
Legal Remedies. section lg9 etc.
Q. This court finding that bill No. /
sets out the truth Of the case. and that
the only difference between REALTORS and
respondent was as to the insertion or
certain words TO which counsel FOR rela-
tors would not have objected had re-
sDondent informed them that he desired
their insertion. are of opinion that tne
rule nisi be made absolute as 10 this nll'
recurring respondent 10 sisn and sea- sal1
UI with such words inserted therein
There being a conaict Of testimony as TO
what bin so. should set out ana the
preDonderance greatly I'm favor OF the
truth of respondents return, tho rule iisl
is not made absolute as to II, put inc
same. as sl.ued and sealed 10y respo"-
dent. shall remain as so signed and as
part of the record IN this case.
FLOATING INSURANCE POLICY.
Nlorotock Insurance Company VS.
Cheek. manager. From the circuit Court
of Norf0lk city. Affirmed. opinion by
Cardweu, Judge.
Insurance by Cheek, manager. for ac-
count OF whom it may concern on l'y
barrels of flour while contained IN storage
warehouse. Entire destruction by fire OF
warehouse ana contents within period OF
policy. Proof OF loss set lOrth mat the
hour burned belonged 10 R0yl, ana none
other had interest therein. In tact, %
belonged TO a milling company, VINO had
consigned IL to Royl, their agent, m Nol-
folk. who had not accepted IL az the tlme
OF the fire. This fact was made known
20 the insurance company about FEBRUARY
g. 1923. the fire having occurred November
II. 1892. and the proof of loss, setting out
ROyi ownership. having been sent m
December ~, lss2. March 3, l%5 the
insurance company took the deposition oil
Cheek, and remaining silent TN May
1873. Check brought suit on the policy
and got judgment.
He'd: i. Ihe mistake IN tse pto0l ol
ioa7 as 10 lHe %" Va '". -" 49,
Delns "l'nout IIauu OF u'.e p1'on, WI NJ NJ
policy is an open or floating policy, the
Il"'''i,91 1.-''o" Ol '''- l"' ''r' ., '-e
mat IL sHo"4u cover any sooNo ot 'H1
spIs.,..i i'l ~ 81
NE 10 co-t.,i ~ ir, ,,,8ns,gs,. ~ 1be
ar,o,,,t 40 ins,,ra,o. .,,.ciecd In s,ich
So, 10 IL, -. ~. l.r.gt of th. ,,er-
eo,, o,,,tn., tr. ,,,,.,,,,t,, ,t the tima Of
t6-, loss t6c,,ob b.. ta1 ro inter,at I'm it
VIZ, tbo ,.,li.,- ,,,os iss,,.I. and .,.trinsic
e,.idcrcl g.. ..lr,issill. r., .bov,' ,,b, us
i'm f,cf co,..rr.I WOOD nm rire In
s,lr.rcs sl.tio,. "a An. va IA
nm Il.,,. 20 ~, i,s,,-,,,,.>- ..l.,,,.,,,,.
fron, and art.. tl ,.r1of oe ti,, ioss T,,r
uisbed h,. the manner and tho infor-
nation ns ro the nartl.s really concerned
I'm the loss certainly as early as Alsrr--
3. 1888. can not Dee consideraI otherwise
than as @ waiver of any further proof OF
the less. Check had the right TO bring
this suit 20 recover the value of the goods
destroyed, 10 pay himself out OF the re-
coNtry 90 the extent OF his interest. and
10 pay balance to the owner. Wood on
Ere Insurance. sections 2So-S2.
OYSTER Law
coi,,,,a,, and .t. Ci.,...,. an, ~.
r,r,,, ,t, - g., l,,...-
,ff,,,,,d o,,i,,t-,, t.,, 5t,,,. -
-, -. "a. o-..'
Int. ,,.,,,. -, l.r ,..r,,t, - ,,,'
,ior tb. ot5 i,,,. t.,,f b,d ,'[t ,,t,,,e,, =,
,rbo,, l.f, II o,,tei.,s ~ ,befr bo',,,ls a.,
b,vir,, tb.i,. f.,9tto, e,,r,,e,,od ,rI r,orl,-
"a ,,,,l,, tb. ,.y, i,.y, II bsins, ,,rooc,I.
MOD ,rr,ll,oe ,,sIo o,nii,.tio, i'm dne
fo.,,, sl. a, and ,t,,fr .r,,Iie,,i,,, y,os
- ,.'..,,.,,f,,l, -, l.v Arn.Ignt, nod
i.,.,,.,.,.,. ,,,s,r,,,,d - i,sr.,,o, ,,bos.
G,,t,. it 10 ,o sssior locations that A. anv-
Lodv els. a,nlied for this Ground they
,.o,,l1 tb.,, rc,+ IL and wished him ia
,ssisa =, - tbf,,
ueld Under the law. tnis was no an
,ti.,tio, an ord tbo insnector nao mn
had mo riabt 10 REGARD such a conditional
aDnlicatlon II WAS his duty unless good
cause was shown against it. no assign the
,.round ~ the .opnellees after thirty days
tbo ,,,,,.l g,s l.l,aI notice
rf,ttr <,rro>,. ,ccor->,,r s.r,,rrn
1Ia.,a,.,,,, ,.s Sbinn,an From the or
...s. 5.-'s r,ot.sn,. ei,,,sd o,in.
,... ,,,' a.. -, I,.Joo
M, a., .,.,.,o1,nt stated, is an ac-
i,,,+.,,,i.,l,-,,,. M tha then conditton or
ii,Itlif, beftgoon the parfies. from which
tbo ls,y f,rnlles "a nror,isa 70 nav tho
b,lo,,co oece,fained and ock,oyvleJeed ia
bo d,,.. n thereby becomes "a new and
iudopendent cause Of action 10 the ex-
tent that recovery may be had upon IL
without setting out or proving items
I'm detail Rut no statement OF account
can eton the running Of the statute upon
tho toms I'm such statement. and which
,.o',ld other,,ise he haired without a