'->. 
 
 .^J^. 
 
 t^V^laJ^ 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 V. 
 
 // 
 
 o 
 
 WJ. 
 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
 iL 
 
 B 
 
 I/. 
 
 i.O 
 
 I.I 
 
 ~ 1^ 12.2 
 
 S? ii£ * 
 
 
 i;£ 
 
 — 6" 
 
 ... |_8 
 
 L25 111.4 llllli.6 
 
 % 
 
 Va 
 
 /j 
 
 ""e. 
 
 
 <>; 
 
 ¥^w 
 
 •1^ 
 
 A 
 
 rtiutugi'dpiuL, 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 33 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, NY. 14580 
 
 (7i6) 872-4503 
 
 
^ Mi? ^ 
 
 M^, 
 
 Z 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICIVIH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproduction. historlque. 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notea/Notaa tachnlquae at bibllographiquaa 
 
 Tha Instltuta haa attampted to obtain tha baat 
 original copy availabia for filming. Faaturaa of thia 
 copy which may be bibiiographically unique, 
 which may altar any of tha irrtagea in the 
 reproouction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 □ Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 □ Covers damaged/ 
 Couverture endommagAe 
 
 □ Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture reataurAe et/ou pellicula 
 
 □ Cover title miaaing/ 
 La titre de couverture manque 
 
 □ Coloured maps/ 
 Cartes gAographiques en couleur 
 
 □ Coloured ink (i.a. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.a. autre que bicue ou noire) 
 
 □ Coloured platea and/or illustrations/ 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleus' 
 
 
 
 n 
 
 n 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Reli* avec d'autrec documents 
 
 Tight binding may causa shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La re liure serrie peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distorsion l« long de la ivjarge intArieure 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutAes 
 lors d'une restauration apparaiaaont dana la texta. 
 maia, lorsque cela Atait possible, cas pagea n'ont 
 pas AtA fiimies. 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm^ la meilleur axemplairct 
 qu'il lui a itt possible de se procurer. Las details 
 de cet exemplaira qui sont peut-4tre uniques du 
 point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvant modifier 
 une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent axigar una 
 modification dans la mAthode normala de filmage 
 sont indiquAs ci-dessous. 
 
 Q Coloured pages/ 
 Pagea de couleur 
 
 □ Pagea damaged/ 
 Pages endommagAes 
 
 □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 Pages restaurias et/ou pelliculAes 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pagea d«color«es, tachatAes ou piquAas 
 
 □Pagea detached/ 
 Pages ditachies 
 
 HShowthrough/ 
 Tranaparance 
 
 □ Quality of print varies/ 
 Qualit* inigala de I'imprestfion 
 
 □ Includes supplementary material/ 
 Comprand du matirial supplAmentaire 
 
 The 
 
 to tl 
 
 'i 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Mition disponibie 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best porsible image/ 
 Lea pages totalament ou partieiiement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata. une pelure, 
 etc.. ont Mi filmtes i nouveau da fapon ii 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 Tha 
 pos 
 oft 
 filrr 
 
 Ori{ 
 bee 
 the 
 sioi 
 oth 
 firs 
 sioi 
 or i 
 
 Th( 
 shi 
 
 Tir 
 
 wh 
 
 Ml 
 dif 
 ent 
 bei 
 rig 
 rec 
 mi 
 
 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentairas supplAmentaires: 
 
 Docket title page is bound in as last page in book but filmed as first page on fiche. 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document ast film* au taux de reduction indiqu* ci-dessous. 
 
 10X 
 
 
 
 
 14X 
 
 
 
 
 18X 
 
 
 
 
 22X 
 
 
 
 
 2SX 
 
 
 
 ^^^ 
 
 30X 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^^^,_ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 y 
 
 
 
 
 ^■^ 
 
 L««J 
 
 i9y 
 
 '■^^ 
 
 ""■^ 
 
 
 16X 
 
 
 
 
 20X 
 
 
 
 
 24X 
 
 
 
 
 28X 
 
 
 
 
 32X 
 
The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 Seminary of Quebec 
 Library 
 
 The images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 The lost recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol -♦• (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc.. may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 L'exemplaire film* fut reproduit grdce i ia 
 ginirosit* de: 
 
 Siminaire de Quebec 
 Bibliothique 
 
 Les images suivantes ont «t« reproduites awe le 
 plus grand soin. compte tenu de la condition at 
 de la nettetA de l'exemplaire film*, et en 
 comormit* avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont ia couverture en 
 papier est imprimie sont fiimis en commandant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 derniire page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'iilustration. soit par le second 
 plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont filmis en commengant par la 
 premiAre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'iilustration et en terminant par 
 la derniAre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaltra sur la 
 derniire image de cheque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: le symbols -^ signifie "A S JIVRE '. le 
 symbole V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent itre 
 filmte A des taux de reduction diff*rents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre 
 reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film* A partir 
 de Tangle supArieur gauche, de gauche h droite, 
 et de haut en bas. en prenant le nombre 
 d'images nicessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent ia mAthode. 
 
 32X 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 

 ::'A«?nv««'»^i5g^j*5jg|^!*^^^*^ 
 
 'W'itfSfSff^^^^^^^tt^. 
 
f 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 \ 
 
 ^ 
 
Lo^ 
 
 irmm^- 
 
 Mtll$ftniltfls:itfm.^-;r-iml. » 
 
 "m-^-m'^ms' 
 
Igrotinte of Cmbs, 
 
 k^nV OAltJaiA, TO, WXT: 
 
 , I COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH. 
 
 JOHN OHALBfERS. 
 
 (Plaintiff in the Court Mm,) 
 
 APPELLANT- 
 
 AND 
 
 The Mutual Fire Insurance Oompany of Stanstead and 
 
 Sherbrooke Counties, 
 
 (Defendants in the ('ourt btlote.) 
 RESPONDENT*. 
 
 ^[?iP[§(L[L/^K]ir'g ©iA§>Eo 
 
 THE aciiou of the Appellant, Plaintiff, in the Court below, was brought in the Su- 
 
 ->- perior Court, at Sherbrcoko, to recover the sum of £375, amount of a policy of insurance granted by 
 the Respondents in his fuvor, and dated March 24th 1864. Tho action was returned into Court, on the 18th 
 dayof March, 1856. 
 
 The declaration, alter alleging the existence of the Insurance Company, as a body politic and corporate, au- 
 thorised by law to effect insurances against loss or damage by fire, sets up the Policy granted by Respondents 
 to Appellant on the 24th day of Match 1854. insuring tho sum of £375 upou the Appellant's stock of goods 
 conMsting of dry goods, crockery, hardware and groceries, situated in a certain store at Richmond, for the period 
 of fivj years; that on the 15th day of May 1856 the stock of goods insured was removed with the consent of ihe 
 Respandentj to a new wooden building near the Railway Depot in Richmond where, by an agreement with 
 the Respondents endorsed upon the policy the goods were to remain insured the same aa before removal ; 
 that appellant was the proprietor of tho last mentioned building and of the insured goods and consequently 
 had an insurable interest in the said goods ; that the goods were consumed by fire on the 27th day of August 
 1856 ; that Appellant gave Respondents duo notice of the fire and of the amount of his claim for indemnity 
 and named an expert on his behalf, and complied wiib all the formalities required by law, but the Respon- 
 dents failed to name an expert on their behalf and refused to settle tho claim of tho Appellant. The conclu- 
 sions are for the sum insured, £375, interest and costs. 
 
 The Rv'spondents met the action by two special exceptions and a defentc an fondt en fait. By their first 
 plea they allege, in unambiguous language, that tho Appellant after removing his goods burned the building 
 in which they had been contained with intent to defraud the Respondents and other Insurance Companies. 
 The second plea alleges that tho goods were insured only in tho building mentioned in the policy, where 
 however they were not burned, and that Respondents did not consent to the alteration of tho policy nor to 
 continue the insurance after removal ; that while the policy granted by Respondents was in force the Appellant 
 effected an insurance upon the same goods with thovEtna Insurance Company, of £800, without tho know- 
 ledge or consent of Respondents and that their policy became in consequence null ; that the sum insured in 
 both policies exceeded tho value of tho goods, and that the double insurance was fraudulent ; that no notice 
 was given by Appellant within 20 days of tho amount claimed and of tho name of an expert on behalf of Ap- 
 pellant ; that Appellant had not accounted for exact quantity of goods, and had not attempted to show the 
 amount of his loss ; that tho fire was caused by tho carelessness and negligence of tho .\ppellant ; that the 
 Appellant fraudulently represented tho amount of his stock at the time of the fire to bo greater than it 
 really was, and removed the most valuable part of the goods previous to the fire and has since disposed of 
 them. "^ 
 
 Issaebeingjoincd, the parties went to evidence, the Respondents at great length. On the 27th day of 
 March last the following judgment was rendered, viz : 
 
 " The Court, &c., considering among other things that at the time the goods insured by the DefendanU in 
 " this cause, for the loss of which the Plaintiff claims to bo indemnified by the said Defendants, were destroy- 
 " ed, tho said goods were also insured by the JUtna Insurance Company, such last mentioned insurance having 
 " been effected by tho Plaintiff without the consent in writing of tho said Defendants, as by law requited, and 
 
 *' without their knowlndsA. as \m nrnVArl Kv fKn avwIaraa <./t/l..nA4 :» *!.:.. .. 1 .L- . fj Tx i> J , 
 
 ""'^- •"" "v..«.. .u „ui<, uui.a.1 IB luuuucu ucusmo iiuit anu voia, aoin maintain tne exception of the said l»e- 
 • fendanta lastly pleaded in this cause, doth declare the said policy so granted by the suid Defendants to the 
 "said Plaintiff, null and void and doth dismiss the action of the said Plaintiff in this behalf, with coats, &c." 
 The principal questions of law raised by the Respondents in their pleas are the following, viz :— 
 
 1. That tho Respondents did not consent to tho allerition of the policy, and that consequently the insur- 
 ance was not continued after tho removal of the goods. 
 
 2. That the policy was rendered Toid by the insurance effected with the JEtna Insurance Company. 
 
 3. That the Appellant failed to give a sufficient notice of his loss within the time prescribed by law. 
 
 1. The alteration of the Poliey. The usual mode of altering a policy of insur«nce is by indorsement in 
 writing made thereon ; (1) and this method was employed in the present case. The Appellant claims that 
 the insurance upon his stock of goods was conUnued by the lUspondents, after removal in virtue of a special 
 indorsement upon tho Policy, signed by their Secretary and tacitly admitted by the Respondents not onlv 
 by their general practice in regard to such continuances of insurance but by their afterwards rejecting the 
 
 Appellant's claim solely upon another ground, The indorsement referred to is in the following terms : 
 
 1. 1 FhlllliM on lunrsace No. 10». — — — — 
 
m 
 
 "The goods insursd within have b«ea removed to a oeir building abouc twenty rodi South of the block of 
 " cottages on the Depot, ground at Richmond Station, where they aro to continue insured the same as bufore 
 "removal. Sherbrooke, July 2l«t 1866. (Signed) IIollis Smith, Sec'y." If it be the practice of an In- 
 surance Company to sanction alterations made by thoir Secretary, this makes his Act valid. ( I ] That such 
 has been the practice of the Respondents is abundantly proved by the evidence of their Secretary and of 
 Leet, one of their agents, as well as by the answoru given on bebulf of the Respondents to the Interrogato- 
 lies swjaitt el articles, submitted to them. The removal of the goods and the alteration of the Policy were 
 known to Respondents but never complained of by thorn. At the annual meeting of the Directors which took 
 place a little more than a month after the flro, and at which, it is to be presumed, the whole matter of the 
 Appellant's claim was gone into, the action of the Secretary, in regard to the alteration of the policy, was 
 not called in question, but was impliedly ratified by the foiinal rejection of the claim upon the sole ground 
 of a double insurance not consented to by the Rospondents. The Appellant need not comment upon the 
 bad faith exhibited by this pretension of the Respondents in regard tu the alteration of the policy, but it 
 would be manifestly unjust for thorn to be permitted to ignore their constant practice and repudiate the ac- 
 tion of thoir principal executive offlcer for tho purpuao of defeating the claim of one of their me mbora. 
 
 2. The, double insurance. It was upon this ground alono thai the action was dismissed. Tho Appellant 
 respectfully maintains that the Court below was in error in holding that tho subsequent insurance "of his 
 goods with the yEtna Insurance Company rendered his policy with the Respondents absolutely null. There 
 is no law of Lower Canada which requires notice of a subaequont insurance to be given to previous insurers, 
 and their consent to the same to be given on pain of nullity of the policy first granted. Such a condition 
 is frequently inserted in policies of insurance, but there was no such condition in tho present cnse. The 
 statute authorising tho establishment of Mutual Firo Insurance Companies in Lower Canada, and under 
 which the Respondents are incorporated, ('2) provides "that if any insurance on any house or building shall 
 "be made with tho Company, and with any other inaurunco company, or office, or person at the same time, 
 "tho policy issued by the company shall bo void, unless such doublo insurance shall have been agreed to by 
 "the dircctoto, and their consent to the same signified by an indursemoot on tho policy, signed by the presi- 
 "dont and secretary." (.M) This pro-ision evidently does not refer to insurances upon goods or other move- 
 able property. If, however, any doubt could exist upon this point, it has been set at rest by the Legislature, 
 in passing tho Act 19 Vic, Cap, 08. The preamblo of this Act declares that it "i> expedient to amend' the 
 Act 4 VVill., •<, Cap. .33, "»o far as relates to double insurance, 4'<"-," and tho lat section provides that, "the 
 "provisions and enactments contained in tho twenty-third section of the above cited Act shall bo held to in- 
 "cludo and have reference to all prnporty, as well personal ns real, ic." It is true that this amending Act 
 does not apply to ponding suits (1) and docs not therefore govern this case ; but it may bo fairly cited as af- 
 fording a rule of interprotat'on, should any bo required, of tho twcnty-tliird section of the Act which it is 
 intended to amend. Dor jlo inaurancex aro recognized both by the Kngliah and French law, and are prohib- 
 ited by neither. Although it is tho practice of aomo insurers to require no'.ice of a double inaurancc, if tho 
 policy contains no stipulation on the subject, the assured may insure with dill'erent companies, and recover in- 
 demnity from any of them. (5) The Appellant maintains that there c:in be no question of this when the 
 value of tho goods does not exceed the amount insured by all tho policies. (6) This, he apprehends, is es- 
 tablished by his evidence of record. Tho insurance wiih tho .V.tnti Inaurance Company wu» cflectcd subse- 
 quently to that with tho Respondents, so tliat there can be no pretension that tho want of notice operated us 
 a misrepresentation or concoalraont. At the timo tho Appellant rc( cived his policy from tho Respondents, he 
 told Mr. Smith, the Secretary, that if hu conhl not get inory insutaocc liom tho Company, he would be 
 obliged to get additional insurance in anouier company. (7) That gentleman did not then inform the Appel- 
 lant that in case he should carry out his intention, he would be required to give notice to tho Respondents, or 
 make any objection to his oifeeting an insurance with another company. The Appellant conceives that he 
 bad a right to effect tho secona insurance, and that the Respondents wera in no way prejudiced by his doing 
 so. 
 
 3. The want of notice of amount claimed, A-r,, mtliin twenty daijf. Immediately after the fire, tho Appel- 
 lant notified the Respondents, by letter, of tho fact, and inquired what verification of his loss was required. 
 The Secretary answered that he must shew as clearly as possible the amount of his loss, but failed to remind 
 him of the time within which his claim ought to bo preferred, and of the necessity of his naming an Expert. 
 A little more than a month elapsed between tho firo and tho formal notice of the Appellant, claiming £375, 
 and naming his Expert. Before receiving this last notice, nt their annual meeting held on the Ist day of 
 Octolier, 1855, the Directors of the Company passed a resolution rejecting the claim of tho Appellant solely 
 upon the ground of the double insurance. No other resolution was passed upon the subject. The notice 
 of the Appellant was answered by tho Jtespondcnts the following day in a letter from tho Secretary, 
 rejecting his claim for tho reason before stated. The Appellant contends that the delay of twenty 
 days imposed by tho statute (8) is not a fatal delay. It is not said that tho claim must be preferred within 
 tho delay n peine de nullile. Such provisions aro always liberally construed. (9) Where the notice is to 
 be given forthwith, and tho giving of it is held to bo a condition precedent, it is sufficient if the condition 
 be performed in a reasonable time. (10) Hut our own law rather regards the interest of the party 
 raising tho objection than any nice technicalities of language, liven tho default to give the notice is not 
 a finde non recevoir to an action on the policy ; (11) and subjects tho assured to no penalty, unless the 
 assurer can shew that he has boon injured by the want of notice. (12) Such injury has not been pretended 
 by the Respondents iii this case, nor could it have been, for they rejected the Appellant's claim before re- 
 ceiving his formal notice. But, oven if the Respondents had a right to require the compliance with the very 
 letter of tho Act, in regard to tho amount claimed and tho naming of an expert, they have waived such right 
 by their silence and by objecting to the loss on another ground. (13) 
 
 The Appellant conceives that upon all these legal questions raised by the Respondents, the weight of au- 
 thority as well as of reason is against them, 
 
 7. 
 
 8. 
 
 9. 
 
 10. 
 
 11. 
 
 12. 
 
 13. 
 
 1. riiillipB lue. No. 110. 
 
 2. (ireonl. Ev. (Edition of 1850,) No. 405, twU. 
 i Will. 1V-. Cap. .'la, p. 594 Kov. Stat. 
 
 " " Sec. 23. 
 
 Sec. 7. 
 
 2 I'hillipa Ins. No. ]2o0. 
 Pothicr Cont. d'.iss. Noa. 159, 100. 
 
 3 I'ardesjua, Or. Coml. No. 767. Merlin, X\rb. t'otiee and Conlrat d'Ai: No. 13. 
 Depoaition of Steel, witncaa ot Appellant. 
 
 4 Will. 4. Cap. 33, Sec. 10. 
 
 23 Weutl. Rep. 525-527. II John. Kep. 240-260. 
 3 Orcenl Ev. No. 406. 
 
 Merlin— IVri. Police el Cont. d'Au. No. 20. 
 Pothier Cont. fAat. No. 127. 
 2 Phill. Ins. Noa. 1803, 1812 and 1813. 
 I " No. 889. 
 
 ■*!»!r:- 
 
South of the block of 
 rad the samn m bufor» 
 i the practice of an In- 
 t ralid. (t] That (uch 
 their Secretary and of 
 nti to the In(errogato- 
 ion of tho Policy were 
 s Directors which took 
 lO whole matter of the 
 on of the policy, was 
 
 upon tho sole ground 
 ot comment upon the 
 I of the policy, but it 
 
 and repudiate tho ac- 
 their members, 
 issed. The Appellant 
 uent insurnnce of his 
 ssolutoly null. There 
 a to previous insurers, 
 d. Such a condition 
 } present cnse. The 
 er Canada, and under 
 oiue or building shall 
 ion at the same time, 
 ave been agreed to by 
 , signed by the prcsi- 
 joods or other move- 
 est by the Legislature, 
 pedicnt to amend' the 
 in provides ihot, "the 
 :t shall bo held to in- 
 at this amending Act 
 r bo fairly cited as af- 
 
 the Act which it is 
 I law, and arc prohib- 
 iblo insurance, if the 
 panics, and recover in- 
 ion of this when the 
 
 he apprehends, is es- 
 y wim effected sul.se- 
 of notice operated us 
 n the Uespundenta.hc 
 ipany, he would be 
 len inform the Appcl- 
 to the Uexpondents, or 
 tnt conceives thut ho 
 >judiced by his doing 
 
 er the Arc, tho Appcl- 
 is loss was required. 
 , but failed to remind 
 is naming an Expert, 
 :IlaDt, claiming £375, 
 id on the 1st day of 
 tho Appellant solely 
 lubject. The notice 
 from the Secretary, 
 he delay of twenty 
 t bu preferred within 
 'here the notice is to 
 cient if tho condition 
 itcrcst of the party 
 vo the notice is not 
 
 penalty, unless the 
 
 1 not been pretended 
 It's claim before re- 
 plianco with the very 
 ive waived such right 
 
 ts, the weight of au- 
 
 modes estabhshed that the amount of goods consumed by the Are wa. between £1300 and f 1.500 
 
 Iho particulars of the Are are proved by tho witnesses Burney and Hay; and the fact that the Afnellanf. 
 stock of goods was removed to the new building and there burned is proved by the two witnel... «& ^ 
 by the wunes.es Dyson, Leet and Steel, The Respondents have bofdlyleJtid'rtheTS plea That thJ 
 Appellant set the tire himself after he had fraudulently removed his good. • but thev have not .H^mn» V, 
 prove either of these allegations, nor have they been ,L to shew the^.I^Jhle.? eason forthelrk su.o fonS 
 rhrfl^o^r";"" '?,t"r .'" «"*• ", '='"'"^'"- O" ">« contrary it i. established in evWonco thaT when 
 tho fire broke out the Appellant was asleep in his bed and that he and the other inmates of the ho u.«k!h 
 some difficulty in securing their personal safety. Tho Appellant cannot thinnhat »h» ™L ii ? ^ 
 crimes such a, are charged upon him by the Respondent.^ buunuZ ted by a syl kble of ev"id'i!!n °° °' 
 
 z:TJ^^;:;i:'£^;S(^^--^^--^^'^ ''"' who were rLyfo^k: :£t':Lr:i:::^^ 
 
 the stock of goods wa. worth about £1500 ; that ifwas „ large sto k for a coun^^'y s to and th"t th.^rd""" 
 
 have no bias towar s ei her party, says tST.^iTLlVr.Uly^^^^^^^^^^ 
 
 hteel, a former clerk of I'laintitf, proves that Appellant had a good stock of eoods 'rhnt .M. , • " 
 
 dence of the amount of u stock of goods is of valL' is es.ablished'not TnTy by tL t •.imoS; of^ he^Ap'odla^n't' 
 but in a pointed manner by that of the Respondents. The witnesses Hoi,ki...on H ^l'^^.? « Appellant 
 Campbell, examined on behalf of the Respondents, agree in j; nT'hlt a o. Z trader an^^ "u 
 
 form a general idea of the value of a stock' of goods, 'it is ,o b'e rema ked 2 ^Uhough the Re.no^^^^^^^^^^ 
 have spared no pains to detect fl.aws in tho statements of tho Appellant thov have nornff.mnfoj , ^^^ u 
 genenil evidence that .e Appellanfs stock of goods was smaffian i' rej e.^Ted b/h Tt-.^^^^ ' 
 
 nfS^~aCS,:f;r^-;S^^ 
 
 in tho .ta.oment. As this exhibit iVmadiZpiri I ^d 1^, 'iho t wT^^^^^ 
 
 poudeius. the Appellant will refer to it. and to the inferences sou«ht t„Z dr wi 1 i To'o mrtS .1 u" 
 when he comes to comment upon the lino of defence adopted by the Kospondcnts I'utieularly, 
 
 1 he Appellant would now call the attention of the Court to tho proof of tho amount of loss which is drawn 
 from those of his books of account which were saved, from hi, invoices so far as collo^t,. 1 !,n,7 
 of hiseush and credit sales, ft will be borne in mind that his c" h hook ani 7 SV^i:^::^^^ 
 clnses were burned. Of cour.o the poHitive proof that would have been afforded ,f the amou.tTf hi^ Zu 
 falom byh.s cash, book bad it been saved, had to be .Hppli.,1 bv general cvidenre Tl.it t I rrV f .1 
 Appellant exceeded his cash sah-s is proved bv lUirney Miller and Steel "hit :^. f ''" "^ 
 
 of tho affairs of the Appellant from tL- materials to b'e p^u ed \J^^ nde fuk f by Mr i"ot: k'""°'"' 
 witness examined on behalf of the Appella-t. and whos!;. business cipacit; abuSaSy tes iBed brtho 
 B atement furnished by him and clearly explained in hi,, deposition 'Vf^er ascertaining tL„'» ? 
 chases from what invoices vVc. could be oblained. Mr. Kingan made « ^utemeiuTf t o r ' ^7 Tu' 
 
 examining every account in the books for that p;rposo ; tlln sutementl ofTow mucl aZi , t hldrS 
 n cash and produce and of moneys paid out. Assuming the cash and credit sale, to bTSarnl hou.h the 
 witness was satished the credit sales were greater. Mr. Kingan established the loss to he more ban £13 00 
 llic summary of his statements and calculations is as follows, viz ;_ il JOO. 
 
 \ot Stock as shewn by Stock fiook K and Invoices £3900 o ,-. 
 
 Deduct— Net Credit Sales jCl^tiO 13 7 " 
 
 Net Cash Sales 1269 13 7 2539 7 2 
 
 The evidence of Mr. Hutch.ns and Mr. Cross, two competent business men. also establlhe, tint the loss of 
 t rutrl I n"' ^^^^r=dcd XIOOO ; and thoy ngr.cin stating faat the result would not have Won mv 
 «nally altered had they taken mtonccount the ^oods saved. The Appelant submits thatthe evidence of Mr 
 ^i:^S'Z^£;.i;ti:::i,!-t:t^ "''°" ^ithmetica/^alculation and unshaken'i/rS 
 
 ...?.'!? 7';"!'' '^""«''''„°f/''°. pjPomlents in adducing evidence in the Court below, were directed to nrovinir 
 a the s atement ; A" furnished by tho Appellant, was erroneous, and that it would be imnosl ble ti^ make 
 such a statement with any degree of accuracy. It cannot be denied that several errors, of 3 or less mat 
 nitudo, were discovered by the Respondent, in the inventory referred to aa -Rook A." The Anne lanlns 
 no desue to dispute this fact, but he does most emphatically deny that the inference of fraud drfwn f^^om it 
 just. Ihe Respondents say that tho book is c.roneous. and their witnesses are unanimou i^a -^rtinJ 
 that such a list could not be made without many errors, even if made with fairness, as uT proved ,ho ^ne 
 m uuestion was. Ihe inference is reasonable then, that tho errors in question were fallen into rneslv and 
 
 Tn'tL"! t o^r' A°^^ ''":'^."'''"' '""^'"- , ^'''■^''■'•'"" ""^K'^*""- A- Beside, no induc'mnt is VhwJ 
 01^ the part of the Appellant to commit a fraud. Tho alleged overcharges amount to TiM I'l 0,1 ? 
 
 with every po.,sible allowance being made, the Uespondents cannot main.a n tlTloss of the ' JJp.3hnt" tn 
 have been less than £1000. Tho amount insured by the policies was je975 InHennn 1, f nf '.V"" '.'"" , '" 
 inventory, there is evidence of record to shew that fr'om th^ tim'; V th„ fast a^olnf o'^T s k p t" t .rtimo 
 of the hro, tho Appellant's stock of goods amounted to £3906 . 2 . 6d, and by his sales to jC25W 7 Z n 
 balance, to represent stock at the time of the fire, was £1 306 . 15 . -Id What became o? these eoods' 'n.: 
 Appellant's evidence establishes that they were burned with the exeeniinn nf „ .1. 1 » . *'^""''- \"« 
 
 Respondent, havo entirely failed to makJgood thrcUf ttt rh^Tods w "re^^^^^^^^^^^^^ aUposed^Jf t 
 he Appellant. To offset ogainst the errors claimed by the Respondents, are tho winte Joods Tefcrred 1 'v 
 Uurney as inauvertently omitted from the statement, and other articles which ns the wkn7..„ i7 
 
 agree in saying, would of necessity be omitted in a statement malo'tVrou: memory ' ""' 
 
 Rut If the Appel.ant committed mistake, in makiu^' out his schedule of goods, u re.-ijy palliation will l.„ 
 M?x'x '-'t" ':i.!^^^i:^^:fi'' f^^'^'^^'^l -d statement, contained it! theTspomlont:' '"ex- 
 '"''~'"""''"'™ **f """ secretary 01 ;bo Compauy.ui.ou these calculations and sta ements. 
 
 ■•■'V',-/r»«f<ttifmmUitm^* ^f lil %Jm Jt U> ft mtmm ,4' '»^ ^< • 
 
the App«lUnt would particularly direct the attention of the Court. After having acoeit to the booke of ac- 
 count of the Appellant, and the •tatemont in their poaicuioi: for two yeara they produced the Kxhibit X\. 
 The object of the Ratpondents in making out this tKbibit, as repeatedly »Ut«d by the Secretary, waa to ar- 
 riTB at a correct account of the Appellcnt'i itock. But in order to do fo, in regard to a great many artirlei, 
 iuchai Tea*, Tobacco, Broad Cloth, Flannela, Coati, Vesta, Qloves, dee., the amount of stock taken in IBS'!, 
 amounting to nearly £1000, was left out of the account altogether, and orrooeous balances put down against 
 the Appellant aa overchargoK ! In some instances the inference is drawn that certain goods are to be deduct- 
 ed, and muat have been disposed of since the fire, simply because they do not appear in the inventory A. 
 These mistakes committed by the Respondents are some of them admitted by the Secretary at the close of 
 his deposition, and are not here referred to with a desire to establish a charge of bad faith against the Uo- 
 spondouts, but simply to show that grave errors may consist with upright intentions, and that the mistskes 
 of ihe Appellant are entitled to be viewed charitably. 
 
 The Appellant submits that he has acted in good faith. He never concealed the fact of the double insur- 
 ance upon his goodf, bat gave notice to the Secretary of the Respondents of his intention to effect it. He 
 has afforded the Respondents every opportunity tu investigate his claim, by giving up sU his books of ac- 
 count. In establishing his loss he followed the mode which the witnesses of the Respocdents say must ne- 
 cessarily have been adopted under the circumstances in which he was placed, and he humbly conceives that 
 the amount of his loss was satisfactorily proved to be much greater than the sum insured upon his goods. 
 
 The judgment of the Court below rests upon « legal objection which the Appellant conceives to be un- 
 fonnded. An examination of the record, as he apprehends, will satisfy the Court here that instead of his 
 aotioD being dismiued, judgment ought to have been awarded him for the full amount of his claim. 
 
 THOMAS W. RITCHIE, 
 
 Wot AppvUant. 
 
 ■ii 
 
 i|' 
 
1011 to thi book* of M- 
 lacod the Kxhibit XX. 
 le tiecteUty, wu to u- 
 D a great many artirlei, 
 of stock taker, in ISSi, 
 anoe« put down againit 
 Ijoods are to be deduct- 
 iur in the inventory A. 
 Secretary at the cloae of 
 d faith againit the Ko- 
 and that the miitakea 
 
 ict of the double iniur- 
 «ntion to effect it. He 
 up nil hii books of ac- 
 ispocdents say must ns- 
 I humbly cunceives that 
 ured upon his goods, 
 nt concoiros to be un- 
 lere that instead of his 
 It of his claim. 
 
 r. RITCHIE, 
 Vor Appellant. 
 
»H«iriiS^lriflWM)m|giiB^>(t,n<»^^