INSURANCE TRIAL.

Wellington Independent, Volume XXVI, Issue 3097, 12 January 1871, Page 2

INSURANCE TRIAL.

Ifc appears from the "Sidney Morning Herald" of December 1, that tho National Marine Insurance Company has obtained a rule nisi for a new trial of the case Cobcroffc v. National Marino Insurance Company, -which was tried in Maitland in October, and which resulted in a verdict I for the plaintiff, with £1200 damages. The " Herald" gives the following particulars respecting the matter : — " The action was upon a time policy by which the barque Prince Eegent, the property of the plaintiff, was insured with the defendants for 12 months, from July, 1869, for a sum of £1,200, the vessel herself being valued at £1,300. The material issue was raised upon a plea that the total loss of the vessel had not been occasioned by any of the perils insured against. The Prince Eegont had been built (at Portsmouth, England), so long ago as 1814, and had been used as a yacht by King George IV. She had, after a lapse of years, found her way out to this colony, and had been purchased by plaintiff, "who had, it was said, expended various sums upon her, and who finally sent her to Gladstone, in Queensland,' for a cargo of cattle. She arrived there on the 4th of August, 1869, but bocarae grounded both at the wharf and in the stream at Auckland.Creek." A survey was held, and it was agreed that she should be taken to South Creek Bench, and laid aground, so that her starboard side might be examined and repaired. As, however, " she was thoroughly aground a large portion of her port side fell out of her, and.whdn the tide came in it had free entrance into her, so that she became a total wreck. The place was fitted for beaching, and the sea very smooth. Many vesßelshad been successfully beached there before. When it was found that the vessel had become a wreck, plaintiff telegraphed in the name of his captain (Hyde) to the defendant's Newcastle agent, reporting the fact, and asking whether he should take charge. The principal question was whether the ship had been lost through injuries covered by the insurance (an insurance against total loas'only), or solely by reason of her having been beached instead of being brought to Newcastle or Sydney for such repairs as were rendered necessary by her having touched ground in Auckland Creek. A rule was asked for upon five grounds ; their general effect being that the verdict was against evidence, inasmuch os there had been nothing to show that the total loss had resulted from any peril, but rather from the needleas beaching of the vessel with all her cargo and ballast on board, and all her masts and rigging up, just as if she were afc sea ; that the Jury had been misdirected by His Honor as to certain principles by which they -were to be guided in considering their verdict ; and that the defendants had discovered fresh evidence — namely, that of the master of the Prince Regent, who was prepared to state that after the vessel had grounded at Auckland Creek, she could easily have been taken to Sydney or Newcastle for repairs ; and this could be done by an hour's pumping morning and evening, in which case, as the insurance wa3 only against total loss, there would be no claim on the company." The Court granted a rule upon all grounds on which it had been asked for, making the last ground subject to fcho filing of a further affidavit, and it was made returnable on Thursday, December 8.