within a limited time according to the regulations of some, to deliver in as particular an account of his loss, or damage, as the nature of the case will admit; and make proof of the same, by his oath or affirmation, by books of accounts, or such other vouchers as shall be required, or as shall be in existence. It is also necessary that the insured should procure a certificate under the hands of the ministers and churchwardens, together with some other reputable inhabitants of the parish, not concerned in such loss, importing, that they are well acquainted with the character and circumstances of the sufferer or sufferers: and do know, or verily believe, that he, she, or they, have really, and by misfortune sustained by such fire the loss and damage therein mentioned. (a) When any loss is settled and affirmed in should take place till the premium was actually paid; a loss happened ment was within 15 days after the end of one half year, but before the premium for afterwards the next was paid; and it was held that the assurers were not liable, though the assured tendered the premium before the end of the 15 days, but after the loss. the Exchequerchamber, 1 Bos. & The defendants in the above cause were members of a society at Liver- Pull. 471. pool, for the insurance of property from fire: but soon after the decision, the Royal Exchange Assurance Company, the Phoenix, and some other Insurance Companies, gave notice that they did not mean to take advantage of the judgment so pronounced, but would hold themselves liable for any loss during the 15 days that were allowed for the payment of the insurance upon annual policies, and all other policies of a longer period. But that policies for a shorter period than a year would cease at six o'clock in the evening of the day mentioned in the policy. Still, in a subsequent case against the Sun Fire Office, which had advertised, the Court held, notwithstanding this advertisement, the assured having had notice, before the expiration of the year, to pay an increased premium for the year ensuing, otherwise they would not continue the insurance, which the assured refused, that the office was not liable for a loss which had happened within 15 days from the expiration of the year, for which the insurance had been made, though the assured, after the loss and before the 15 days expired, tendered the full premium, which had been demanded, the Court being of opinion that the effect of the whole contract was only to give the assured an option to continue the assurance or not during 15 days after the expiration of the year, by paying the premium for the year ensuing, notwithstanding an intervening loss, provided the office had not, before the end of the year, determined the option, by giving notice that they would not renew the contract upou the same terms. (a) Since the first three editions of this work were published, it has been held by the Court of King's Bench, upon a writ of error from the Court of Common Worsley v. Wood, 6 Term Rep. 710, Beawes, 4th and adjusted, the sufferers are to receive immediate satisfaction, In the Lex Mercatoria it is said, that policies on houses and edit. p. 294. lives admit of no average. That this is true of the latter cannot be denied, as we have already shown in the preceding chapter; because the payment of the whole sum depends upon one single event, which must wholly happen, or not at all. But that it cannot be true of insurances against fire either of houses or goods is equally clear; for houses may be partially damaged, and goods may be partially destroyed. In which case, as insurance is a contract of indemnity, the end of the contract is answered by putting the party in the same situation in which he was before the accident happened. But if he were to recover the whole sum insured, he would be in a better situation, which the law will not allow. Indeed, from the above quotation from the printed proposals it is evident, that the offices consider themselves liable for partial losses. Nay, some of them, if not all, expressly undertake to allow all reasonable charges, attending the removal of goods, in cases of fire, and to pay the sufferer's loss, whether the goods are destroyed, lost, or damaged by such removal. Royal Exchange As Surance Company, Sun Fire Office, Phoenix Fire Office, &c. These policies of insurance are not in their nature assignable, for they are only contracts to make good the loss which the contracting party himself shall sustain; nor can the interest in them be transferred from one person to another without the consent of the office. (a) There is a case in which, by the proposals, these policies are allowed to be transferred, and that is, when any person dies, the policy and interest therein shall continue to the heir, executor, or administrator, respectively, to whom the property insured shall belong; pre 574. S. C. 2 H. Black. Common Pleas, that the printed proposals, containing the above clause, are to be considered as part of the policy: and that the procuring such a certificate is a condition precedent to the right of the assured to recover, and cannot be dispensed with, even though the minister and churchwardens wrongfully refuse to grant the certificate. 1 H. Black. 254, and Oldham v. Bewick, 2 H. Black. 577. n. (a) (a) But in marine insurances, the policy may be transferred. Delancy v. Stoddart, 1 Term Rep. 26. vided, before any new payment be made, such heir, executor, or administrator, do procure his or her right, to be indorsed on the policy at the said office, or the premium be paid in the name of the said heir, executor, or administrator. But in all other cases, there can be no assignment; and the party claiming an indemnity must have an interest in the thing insured at the time of the loss. These points were decided in two causes, one before Lord Chancellor King, and the other before Lord Hardwicke. Lynch and Dalzell and others, another v. 3 Brown's Parl. Cases, On the 28th of July 1721, one Richard Ireland took out from the Sun Fire Office, a policy of insurance, whereby it was witnessed, that whereas the said Ireland had agreed to pay, or cause to be paid to the said office, the sum of five shillings within fifteen days after every quarter-day, for the 497. insurance of his house, being the Angel Inn at Gravesend, with his goods and merchandise as therein-after expressed only, and not elsewhere, viz. the dwelling-house, not exceeding 400l. and for the goods in the same only, not exceeding 500l.; and for the stable only, not exceeding 100l. all then occupied by James Peck, from loss and damage by fire; and so long as the said Richard Ireland should duly pay or cause to be paid five shillings a quarter, as therein mentioned, the said society did bind themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, to pay and satisfy the said Ireland, his executors, administrators, and assigns, within fifteen days after every quarter-day, in which he should suffer by fire, his loss not exceeding 1oool. according to the exact tenor of their printed proposals. The policy was subscribed the 28th of July 1721, by three of the trustees of the society. Some considerable time afterwards, Richard Ireland died, having made his will, and Anthony his son sole executor; who brought the policy to the office, and had an indorsement made thereon, that the same then belonged to him: and afterwards, namely, at or about Christmas 1726, he the said Anthony paid the office a premium of twenty shillings for one year's insurance, from Christmas 1726, to Christmas 1727, as by an article in the proposals, he was at liberty to do. On the 24th of August 1727, a fire happened at Gravesend, which, among others, destroyed the house mentioned in the policy; and some time afterwards the appellants applied to the office, and alleged, that Beawes, 4th and adjusted, the sufferers are to receive immediate satisfaction, without any deduction. In the Lex Mercatoria it is said, that policies on houses and edit. p. 294. lives admit of no average. That this is true of the latter cannot be denied, as we have already shown in the preceding chapter; because the payment of the whole sum depends upon one single event, which must wholly happen, or not at all. But that it cannot be true of insurances against fire either of houses or goods is equally clear; for houses may be partially damaged, and goods may be partially destroyed. In which case, as insurance is a contract of indemnity, the end of the contract is answered by putting the party in the same situation in which he was before the accident happened. But if he were to recover the whole sum insured, he would be in a better situation, which the law will not allow. Indeed, from the above quotation from the printed proposals it is evident, that the offices consider themselves liable for partial losses. Nay, some of them, if not all, expressly undertake to allow all reasonable charges, attending the removal of goods, in cases of fire, and to pay the sufferer's loss, whether the goods are destroyed, lost, or damaged by such removal. Royal Exchange As Surance Company, Sun Fire Fire Office, &c. These policies of insurance are not in their nature assignable, for they are only contracts to make good the loss which the contracting party himself shall sustain; nor can the interest in them be transferred from one person to another without the consent of the office. (a) There is a case in which, by the proposals, these policies are allowed to be transferred, and that is, when any person dies, the policy and interest therein shall continue to the heir, executor, or administrator, respectively, to whom the property insured shall belong; pro 2 H. Black. 574. S. C. See also Routledge v. Burrell, 1 H. Black. 254, and Oldham v. Bewick, 2 H. Black. 577. n. (a) Common Pleas, that the printed proposals, containing the above clause, are to be considered as part of the policy: and that the procuring such a certificate is a condition precedent to the right of the assured to recover, and cannot be dispensed with, even though the minister and churchwardens wrongfully refuse to grant the certificate. (a) But in marine insurances, the policy may be transferred. Delaney Stoddart, 1 Term Rep. 26. vided, vided, before any new payment be made, such heir, executor, or administrator, do procure his or her right, to be indorsed on the policy at the said office, or the premium be paid in the name of the said heir, executor, or administrator. But in all other cases, there can be no assignment; and the party claiming an indemnity must have an interest in the thing insured at the time of the loss. These points were decided in two causes, one before Lord Chancellor King, and the other before Lord Hardwicke. Lynch and Dalzell and others, another v. 3 Brown's Parl. Cases, On the 28th of July 1721, one Richard Ireland took out from the Sun Fire Office, a policy of insurance, whereby it was witnessed, that whereas the said Ireland had agreed to pay, or cause to be paid to the said office, the sum of five shillings within fifteen days after every quarter-day, for the 497. insurance of his house, being the Angel Inn at Gravesend, with his goods and merchandise as therein-after expressed only, and not elsewhere, viz. the dwelling-house, not exceeding 400l. and for the goods in the same only, not exceeding 500l.; and for the stable only, not exceeding 100l. all then occupied by James Peck, from loss and damage by fire; and so long as the said Richard Ireland should duly pay or cause to be paid five shillings a quarter, as therein mentioned, the said society did bind themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, to pay and satisfy the said Ireland, his executors, administrators, and assigns, within fifteen days after every quarter-day, in which he should suffer by fire, his loss not exceeding 1000l. according to the exact tenor of their printed proposals. The policy was subscribed the 28th of July 1721, by three of the trustees of the society. Some considerable time afterwards, Richard Ireland died, having made his will, and Anthony his son sole executor; who brought the policy to the office, and had an indorsement made thereon, that the same then belonged to him: and afterwards, namely, at or about Christmas 1726, he the said Anthony paid the office a premium of twenty shillings for one year's insurance, from Christmas 1726, to Christmas 1727, as by an article in the proposals, he was at liberty to do. On the 24th of August 1727, a fire happened at Gravesend, which, among others, destroyed the house mentioned in the policy; and some time afterwards the appellants applied to the office, and alleged, that |