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. 1809 Excerpt: ...of the Commercial Insurance Company, and acting in their behalf in relation to the cargo, consented that the cargo should be received by the said company; that there was no communication between the defendants and the Commercial Insurance Company; but Kermit, who was the ngent of the ALBANY, defendants, knew that all the cargo was delivering to the Augustisaa Commercial Insurance Company, and made no objection. Griswold 10. That it is usual for the different Insurance Compaew York Ins to emplv persons, who are called inspectors to ex-Company. amine and report the condition of vessels; and in case of damage or accident to any property insured, to give directions, and to aid and assist in its preservation; and that Kermit acted in this character for the defendants; and one Whitlock for the Commercial Insurance Company; but they had no power to bind the company to accept an abandonment. H. That about 900 barrels of the flour were taken out at Long-Island, and the residue at New-York; and one of the plaintiffs was frequendy at the ship while unlading at New-Tori. ll For the plaintiffs, it was contended, that it was a settled principle of the law of insurance, that whenever a voyage is broken up, or defeated by any of the perils in-'' sured against, the insured has a right to abandon; that by the facts in the present case, it was manifest that the voyage was wholly defeated; for if the cargo had been reshipped, and sent to its port of destination, it would inevitably have been so much deteriorated, as not to be worth the freight. It was found to be the invariable usage never to reship damaged flour. There was then such a destruction of the cargo, as wholly to defeat the object of the voyage. It would be unreasonable to oblige the insured to send on a cargo in a ...