Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Court of Common Pleas, and Other Courts Volume 1; From Easter Term, 36 Geo. III. 1796, to [Hilary Term 44 Geo. III. 1804] ... Both Inclusive - With Tables of the Cases and Principal Matters (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1820 Excerpt: ... is neither the person interested, the consignor, the consignee, the person giving the order for insurance, nor the person receiving it from those who are interested. By the expression " as agents" used in this policy, the underwriter has been deceived, since he may have been led to suppose that (349) Barrett and Co. were the general agents of the Plaintiffs, which they do notappea-to have been. 2dly, The supposition of this property having belonged to the PlaintifFbefore the commencement of the war, is excluded by the case. It is established by Bristow v. Towers, that the insurance of enemy's property is illegal; and though the judgment in that case appears to have beqp given with reference to Brandon v. Nesbitt, yet they were different; for as there was a plea of alien enemy in the one and not in the other, we must conclude that tiristow v. Towers was decided on the illegality of the trade. With respect to the policy of the question, this case is stronger than the two above-mentioned decisions; for if it be not lawful for an enemy to spend his money here to the advantage of this country, it certainly cannot be lawful for a British subject to enrich the enemy by purchasing his goods. By the case in 2. Roll. Abr. 173. Prerogative(Li), Guerre, it distinctly appears, that it is illegal for an Englishman to traffic in the enemy's country. The commencementof hostilities puts an end to all amity and commerce(A). If this neutral vessel had been captured by an English slrip of war, though the vessel would have been restored to the owners, it is clear, both from the general practice of the Court of Admiralty, and from the express decision by the Lords Commissioners of Appeal in the Ixiuha Margaretha, Henslop, 3d April 1781, that the goods would have ...