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. 1844 edition. Excerpt: ... Marine Insurance Company of Alexandria v. Tucker. 3 Cranch's Reports, 357. cleared for Falmouth, and a bond was given to land the whole cargo in Britain. No evidence was given that the vessel was bound to Cadiz; she was taken before she came to the dividing point. At the trial of this cause, Lord Mansfield told the jury, that if they thought the voyage intended was to Cadiz, they were to find for the assured; but if there was no design to go to that port, then they were to find for the defendant, and the ground upon which the court decided the motion for a new trial was, that there never was an intention to go to Cadiz. But it is plain, that if Cadiz had been intended as the ultimate port of destination, the clearing out for an intermediate port, with an intention to land the cargo there, would not have been considered as any thing more than an intended deviation. Way v. Modigliani was decided in 1787, and was an insurance at and from the 20th of October, 1786, from Newfoundland to Falmouth, with liberty to touch at Ireland. She sailed on the 1st of October, from Newfoundland, went to the Banks and fished till the 7th, and then sailed for England, and was lost on the 20th. The reasons assigned for the decision of this case, give it the appearance of an authority unfavourable to the doctrine laid down in the above cases. But the weight of it is greatly diminished, if it be not destroyed, by the following considerations: 1. That as there was a clear deviation, it was unnecessary to decide the other point, that the policy did not attach; and 2. That this latter opinion seems to have been entertained only by one of the court, and even this judge seems to have relied very much upon the fact, that the vessel sailed to the Banks. 3. From what is said in ...