The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1897-02-22
BIG INSURANCE CASE.
Growing ont of the Burning of Naval
Stnrea.

stores.
Brunswick. Ca, Feb. 2.-The most Inn
portant fire insurance case which has ever
come up In this county is now In the hands
or attorney Owen Johnson, recently ap-
pointed auditor by Judge Sweat 1t CON
slsts OF Gains made by Paterson, Down
Ing x Co. of savannah and the Downing
company of New York, Brunswick and
elsewhere, against both fire and marine
tnsSdrah ace companies and counter claims
made by these companies against both
specified firms and against each other.
Inc companies involved In the case and
AMOUNTS are; Macon Fire, 5000; North
E Spislsn ana Mercantile. 5000 Insurance
company OF North America, $1,000 Lion,
I,o0O; Fire Association of Philadelphia
$1'9VV0, hanover, $500; Home, 5000; Aetna
S2'VUGi Hartford, 5000; Thames & Mersey
Marine insurance Company, limited OF
London, $40, 900; London Assurance Compa-
ny, Ss3VO The net loss claimed against
5 5neSe companies by the two firms Is $50
ZSl'lt win % per cent. added for damages
sustained by delays in settlement Together
with attorneys fees incurred In securing
same iIt :, no proportion these claims and adj
agreed upon Attorney johnson as audi
TOR. The history of the case to date is
as Ionows: On April 2, 1896 fire was com
dn IuII,ca nS TO the yards warehouses and
LOCKS voc rs OF OF the Downing company, destroy
iihs Io4il barrels of rosin, t,220 casks spir-
us tuTpehtlne, 600 empty casks, of the In
market mark cost Ha;uS OF slo'7qi9e The cash
u.s., 1851. The net salvage of rosin MAS MAS
SooSiSS, turpentine, %6l6.S7. The net loss
al invoice cost was $965l9.76, Ten per
cent added under terms OF agreement
made this $l06 l7l.73, with a net loss on The
basis OF cash market value al the time Of
IRE r OF $SS, II, The property was owned
py paterson, Downing & Company. and
held In trust by the Downing Companv
Inc policies We're held by the Downing
company who sue for the use of Paterson
Downing & Company Policies in The Ma
con tlre, Hanover Homo
Iord. tlre Assurance of PHILADELPHIA.
North British and Mercantile Lion and
insurance Company of North America.
houses and docks a Brunswick on follow
ing provisions: policies not to cover any
naval stores covered in whole or part by
any marine insurance company; liable only
for such proportion of the whole loss as
the amount the insurance bore to the cash
value OF the whole property thereby in
sured at time of the fire the adjustment
TO be made at value of property at time
OF destruction; other concurrent Insurance.
permitted without notice until required 3"
Policies were issued in the London As
| surance Company and the Thames & Mer-
sey Company on goods for TRANSPORTATION
or ready for transportation va rail or
other Conveyances, from time bills of lad
ing were signed, until laden on board ships
at various stated points in Georgia, Caro-
lima and Florida used by the company. The
policy in the Thames and Mersey Company
was for two-fifth interest In all goods
at invoice cost and ten per cent added
the liability not TO extend over $4,000 at
| any one time by any one convey
cality. One policy in the London
Assurance Company was issued under
similar conditions, the amount stated be-
ing three-ifths interest, the entire la
bility not to exceed $50 600, AT a later day
this company took an excess insurance
| OF $4,000 over and above that already
insured by them, making the total for
the two marine companies 100000 On
claims for loss presented by the Down
ing Company the London Assurance Com
pany paid $47270.56; Thames and Mersey,
| 81, S17.64, and the North British and Mer-
camille 81, $3.50 These amounts the re-
spectively named companies claim cover
their proportion of the entire loss. The
remainder, they claim. should be paid by
the other companies named above in pro-
portion to amounts carried The other
companies claim that their policies were
Company that the stock belonged to Pat
| erson, Downing q Co, and, Furthermore,
surance and the Thames and Mersey Com
| pany should be exhausted before they
| are called upon to cover losses.
In no instance do any Of the companies
interested set up that the entire loss
claimed was not sustained, but on the set
Element the issue is raised as to whether
the marine insurance policies did or did
not stand liable for the full extent of the
policies issued, without regard to those
issued under the form of the standard fire
insurance policies of New York. IL will
VIC the uuNy VI AuuitOi JoiHsOu 10 near all
the evidence submitted and pass upon
such questions TAow pending In shape Of
demurrers to answers, and file his report
not later than April 20.
The evidence is volume in itself After
sitting il and looking at the law on the
subject, he will decide whether or not the
policies in the marine companies must be
exhausted before a Call Is made upon the
others named Unless there are objections
to his report, 1t will be made the Judgment
of the court and further payments will be
made in accordance with II. The seec-
ton OF auditor e decided compliment to
involves some very intricate points of law
Many attorneys are engaged in It, and I'M
efforts to settle the matter out of the
courts experts were engaged in New York
to submit opinions. They did not arrive
at satisfactory solution, hence the pres
ent contest