IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 1.25 2.5 1^ m 12.0 1.8 U ill 1.6 P /} %^ '% ^ ^\ ''^. o y CIHM Microfiche Series (Monographs) ICIMH Collection de microfiches (monographles) Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes / Notes techniques et bibliographiques The institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. □ Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur D Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagte Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restauree et/ou pellicula D □ Cover title missing/ Le titre de couvertu couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes g^ographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relie avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distorsion le long de la marge interieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela etait possible, ces pages n'ont pas ete f ilmees. □ Additional comments:/ Commentaires supplementaires: This item is filmed at the reduction rwtio checked below/ Ce document est filme au taux de reduction indique ci-dessous. D D n n D L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a eti possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-fitre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite. ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mithode normale de f ilmage sont indiqu^s ci-dessous. □ Coloured pag?s/ Pages de couleur □ Pages damaged/ Pages endommagees □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurees et/ou pelliculies Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages decolorees, tachet^es ou piquees Pages detached/ Pages detachies 0Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of print varies/ Qualite inegale de I'impression Continuous pagination/ Pagination continue Dir. dudes index(es)/ Comprend un (des) index Title on header taken from:/ Le titre de I'en-tSte provient: □ Title page of issue Page de titre de la □ Caption of issue/ Titre de depart de la livrai n livraison ivraison Masthead/ Generique (periodiques) de la livraison 10X 14 X loy 22X 26 X 30X 12X 16X 20X 24X 28 X 32 X 1 The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: National Library of Canada L'exemplaire filmd fut reproduit grdce d la g6n6rosit6 de: Bibliothdque nationale du Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — ^^ (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les images suivantes ont 6td reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettetd de l'exemplaire filmd, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimde sont film^s en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont film^s en commenpant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de chaque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole — ^> signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbole V signifie "FIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre filmds d des taux de reduction diff^ients. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clich6, il est filmd A partir de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images n^cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mdthode. 1 2 3 32 X 1 2 3 4 5 6 If mrORTANT FIRE INSURANCE CASE. ADOLPHE LAZARE VERSUS THE ROYAL INSURANCE 00. BK POKE Mr. justice RICHARDS. MAY, 1858. TORONTO: MACLEAK, TilOMAH & <0., PRlNTERy, 17 A I'J KIKtJ STKKKT KAST. LAZAKE V. THE UUYAL liSSUKANOE COxMPANY. S r K C I A L JURY. JAMES BEATY, DALRYMPLE CllAWFOllD, HENRY DENNIS, WILLIAM HARTMAN, GEORGE IRWIN, WILLIAM JAMES, ARTHUR McMASTER, WILLIAM A. ?UK, THOMAS SIIARl'E. JOHN TILT, JOSEPH WRIGHT, THOMAS BRUNSKILL. LAZARE V. THE PHCENIX INSURANCE COMPANY. SPECIAL JURY. THOMAS BRUNSiJILL, ANDREW CRAWFORD, WILLIAM LINDSAY. JAMES McMULLIN, JAMES PRICE, WILLIAM SELBY, ALFRED STEVENS, WILLIAM CREIGHTON, WILLIAM LEE, E. BRYSON, JAMES TAYLOR. JOHN STREET. LAZAEE y. THE ROYAL INSURANCE CO. Tliis was an actiun brought before a special jury by the plaintiff to recover the amount of his policy in defendant's Company, in which his stock was insured prior to a fire which occurred in the plaintiff's premises — a shop in the llossin House — on 17th December, 1857, at half-past G P. iM., which was immediately arrested, and no goods were supposed to be lost by fire. The Company resisted the claim, on the grounds that the conditions of the policy had not been complied with, and aiso that the plaintiff had practised fraud, and false declaring and affirming, and had by such practices forfeited all claim or benefit under the policy. The plaintiff was also insured in the Phanix Company, who likewise resisted his claim on the same grounds. Counsel for Plaintiff— \l. Eccles, Q. C. ; Counsel fur Defendant— llos, J. II. Cameron, Q. C, Dr. Connor, Q. C, and Thomas Galt, Esq. His Lordship Judge Richards presided. Mr. Eccles, in opening the case, said : I may tell you, gentlemen of the jury, that the fates are rather against my client this morning— in one respect— that his counsel is hoarse ; but as I get into the case, I trust that hoarseness will wear oflF, I have a 'serious responsibility to-day— having solely to conduct a very important case, in which I am opposed by a row of very eminent counsel. I feel I shall have to exert myself in some mea- sure—not to endeavor to make plain that which is already plain enough, the right of my client— but to guard against any extraneous matters being brought in here, in order that the case may assume a confusion. As it presents itself to my mind, the case is as clear as can be. The plaintiff in this action, Mr. Lazare, is a Frenchman by birth, and has but a very sliglit knowledge of the language, manners or customs of this country, lie established a business in Toronto, much to the satisfaction of the public generally ; and he effected two policies of insurance on his stock, one of which forms the subject of the present action. The policy I now hold in my hand is one granted by the defendants in this suit— the Royal Insurance Company. On the 18th January, 1857, they insured X1,000 on his stock-in-trade, consisting of the fancy articles and dry goods contained in his store, Rossin IL.use. There are certain conditions in this policy, as in all policies, the main object beinjr to guard the companies against the imposition of fraud ; and these conditions are exceedingly stringent in their terms, holding the insured to forfeiture on the slightest omission of the redtrictioiis No doubt, gentlemen of the jury, many of you have observed how strictly the Companies tie down the insured to obey the minutlo} of their conditions before they receive the amount insured. Such a plan is of course necessary to protect the Companies, and no one can blame a company for attach;jg the most stringent conditions to their policies to guard against any fraud in the power of man to commit. Now, we say we have fulfilled all the conditions of our policy. The declaration of the plaintiff simply states that this policy had been made, and that a fire broke out in December last in the basement of the store in question, by which damage was sustained to the amount of X3,000, a fair portion of which this Company is liable to pay — that is, if we are in a position to recover at all. In answer to the plaintiff, the defendants give the Court and jury to understand they will raise a constitutional issue, which you are now sworn to try. What the defendant says in the first place is a mere matter of form. The making of the policy is denied. This is, how- ever, merely to canse us to produce it, and we intend doing so. for all the purposes of the trial, we will therefore call the second position of the defendants first ; and in that they say that the stock-in-trade, shop furni- ture and fixings mentioned in the declaration were not destroyed, damaged or lost, as therein mentioned. The object of that statement is, probably, to put us on trial of the exact amount of loss sustained. And while on this point I may say that i^ is almost a matter of impossibility in many instances, and a matter of great diflBculty iu all, for any party sustaining loss by fire to tell the Insurance Company exactly what he has lost. All the law reqjuires a man to do is to ^how to the utmost of his power what he has lost, and the amount of his damage ; and when he has done that, the jury are asked to satisfy themselves what the amount really is. So it will be with us to-day. We shall not offer evidence of every article Mr. Lazare lost ; but we will bring parties here who will give you a correct idea of the worth of the goods and the loss which must have been sustained by fire. And so far as I have been able to form an opinion of the evidence, we will be able to make out a much better and stronger case than generally h'ippens. It so happened that on the 31st August, Mr. Lazare commenced business and took stock, and we may be able to show what he bad in hand that day. But even there we may find difficulties. Mr. Lazare did not find it necessary to employ numerous clerks about the establishment, the sole parties managing the business being Mr. Lazare, his wife, and two young ladies. He kept his own books, and therefore we have no book-keeper to produce. Such being the case, I ask is it not reasonable for the jury to be satisfied with the best evidence we can give them — the evidence of the books in Mr. Lazare's handwriting ; the evidence of his two assistants, tuat day by day Mr. Lazare entered the sales la his own Landwrltli)g ? It ■will be found that nearly all Mr. Lazare's entries are made in French, that being his native language. So we shall perhaps have to furnish you with Hn interpreter. Mr. Lazaro did not understand keeping books in English, and he congcqncntly kept them in French and in the currency of France — a currency with wliich we have very little to do, in the Upper Province at all events. After the stock was taken on the 31st of August, Mr. Lazare received largo consignments of goods from time to time. With a few ex- ceptions of some small bales bought at ilamilton or Montreal, the main bulk of his stock was imported from Paris ; for ho almost exclusively dealt in French goods, and we can produce the original invoices of these goods from Paris. As to the mode in which thene goods were taken into and arranged in the shop, wc shall bring forward the two young lady attend- ants. They were the persons who called out the goods as they were taken from the pack, and saw their prices ticked on the margin of the invoices. And they will be able to toll you that all these goods were received by Mr. Lazare in his shop. From these circumstances we will be able to know the amount, or very nearly so, of Mr. Lazare's stock between the^lst of August, 1857, and the 7th of December, when the fire broke out. The next step to be taken in forming our estimates is to find out the sales during that period. That we shall slvow by the production of the day book, and by the evidence of the two young ladies, who will give general evidence us to everything sold. A cash business was principally done. The proceeds of these sales were handed over to Mr. Lazare, who made entries of them during the day and posted up at night. They will also bo able to tell you that no goods went out except such as were so sold and entered, and none could go out without their knowledge. The next thing to learn is, what «tock was there after tlie fire ; and of that we Lave the most satisfactory and best evidence. Wherever a fire takes place, it ':) a well understood custom that before anything is touched or removed ti ' 'jsurance Company and the sufierer by the fire appoint two persons to go and inspect all the remains of goods on the ruins of the house. As in this instance, they take possession of everything, and what there is capable of valuation they fix a value on. Whatever deficiency appears after deducting the remains of the ijoods from the balance of stock on hand, is thus found to be the amount missing, lost or damaged. All these steps have been taken by the Insurance Company. They appointed a valuator, who, in conjunction with one ap- pointed by us, filled a book with a detailed statement of Mr. Lazare's stock, and put down, as nearly as they could, the present value of what remains. I am not aware that the Company attempted to impute any fraud to these parties, and we, on our part, are perfectly willing to be bound by their valuation, though they may have put down many things much lower than they ought to have done. This evidence will, I doubt not, prove satisfao tory, and dispose of that issue. The second plea on which the Company rely is as follows : They have a special provision, to the effect that all persons insured by thio Company who shall sustain loss or damage by fire, are immediately to give notice to the Company or its agent ; and within fourteen days after the fire thoymust give in an particular m ftcootint of their loss as the nature of tlie case will admit, and make proof of the same by their declaration or affirmation ; and if there eliould appear to be fraud in such statement or declaration, then the assured shall forfeit all claim under the p. icy. The plaintiff complied with this law ; but his statement and declaration were set aside. The defendants further tuld the plaintifl" they would claim from him a statement of the quantity, quality, and prices of each article. Now it is for you to say is that a reasonable demand. We see that Mr. Lazare, within the specified 14 days, did deliver in aa particular an account of his loss as the law requires, and confirmed it by declaration under oath. As to setting forth in detail the quantity, quality, and price of each article, wo set Ibrth that it is not a reasonable demand under the circumstances. The plaintiff further states tiiat he offered the Insurance Company as practical a statement of his loss as he could give ; that^ he offered to show the agent of the Company his stock-books and invoices, but the said agent refused to examine the same. For a fourth plea the defendants say that in the affidavit of the plaintiff there is false swearing, inasmuch as he swears that he lost £3,175 8s. Id., while his actual loss was only £750. Now that is really the contest to-day. The Company charge Mr. Lazare with wilful and corrupt perjury, and they say the policy is void. Now I will only remark that it is to be hoped when the Insurance Company dare to charge a man of respectability and stand- ing in society with the crime of perjury, that they had previously taken every step to ascertain that their accusation was founded in truth. If, on the contrary, the Company made that statement loosely, then they had taken a most unwarrantable step; and you, gentlemen of the jury, have now to determine that issue. You are trying Mr. Lazare fjr perjury, ns if he were a criminal in the dock, and unless satisfied you can convict him on that charge, you cannot find that issue in favor of defendant this day. Now the very best business men are occasionally liable to mistakes ; much more so when, in case of fire, he is tied down to 14 days to get his certifi- cate from the magistrate, make his affidavit, and make out a statement of his losses. A foreigner, like Mr. Lazare, would, of course, be much more liable to fall into mistakes ; but his committing an error does not make him guilty of pe.jury ; and he is charged with wilful and corrupt perjury. We set them all at defiance. We challenge them to bring home to Mr. Lazare one atom of evidence touching the crime with which they have charged him. Another condition of the policy is, that before the assured is entitled to receive his money he must get a magistrate of the neighbor- hood to certify his belief that through misfortune, and without evil practice, the assured suffered loss to the amount stated. That wo have got. This liiiidavit is from Mr. Alderman Brunei, who certifies that he knew Mr, Lazare, and was acquainted with his character and circumstances, and that he did on the 17th December suffer loss and damage by fire to his stock. IIo states hia bolief tlmt by niisfurtunc, and not through any ovil pnicticcH, Mr. Lazare sustained loas and damage to tho amount of X3,000. Now that is admitted on tho record ; and I offer it to you as a strong cir- cumstance in itself, that an Alderman of the city having taken tho trouble to investigate the whole thing, fully subscribes tc it and bears out our statement. They say we were bound to furnish them with proper proofs, and neglected to do so. Xow I shall show you tho steps wo took in that respect. Wc served them with a notice on tho 22ud February, stating that since tho 11th January last wo had been willing to show all books, papers and documents connected with tho establishment, and that at any reasonable and fit place tho same might be inspected. They were also furnished with a notice, setting forth that these bouks would lie at tho law office of Messrs. Eccles, Carroll & Doyle, for one week, during which time they might bo inspected. Now we thought that as fair an invitation as wo could possibly give. The simple answer to this was, that they did not consider our affidavit and notice satisAictory, or a compliance with the terms of the policy. Now what sort of treatment is that from an Insurance Company ? Mr. Lazare's affidavit was to the effect that on the 18th June, 1857, the Royal Insurance Company gave him a policy on his stock. On the 17th December a fire broke out, which fire was, to the best of his know- ledge, occasioned by a flaw in tho hot air furnace. The value of tho stock- in-trade at this period was $21,983,29. Of goods lost or damaged, the amount was $12,703,01, or thereabouts. Tho shop fixinga were damaged to the extent of about £137. This was as full a statement of the case as could well be given. Yet with those facts all before them, they tell us we have not complied with the terms of our policy. It is very probable that what the Company wanted was to get Mr. Lazare's books into their hands. It is fortunate tb'^ "'se came into my hands before they succeeded. I happen to have P' mj little experience i.. Insurance Companies, and of this Phanix Company in particiilar. Such was their conduct in a case in Montreal, that the learner' judgo pronounced them guilty of a fraud. They kept the books of an insured party, and yet insisted on his making up a statement of his accounts. I would advise a client to let an Insurance Company see his books, make extracts from them, but not to attempt to take them away. How should we have been abie to make out a case without our books. If, then, those books were everything to Mr. Lazare, was he not perfectly justified in keeping them ? The statement of the losses delivered to the Company were made out by Mr. Maulson. As to the charge of j£3,000 damages preferred by the plaintiff, some people migh' be surprised at so large an amount being df;stroyed in so short a time. But to give yoa an idea of the value of Mr. Lazare's stock, I would ask you to fancy £7 10s. being charged for a lady's pocket handkerchief, and such handkerchiefs were there in dozens. The Insurance Company insured them I ;i 8 nitl nrtii'l icso prices. In order to convince you of tlio smnll compnss (heso dear t'H would fit into, I told Mr. Lnznrc to-dny to pncii me up a l.ox with ■7o^,v worth in it, iinere put in contain- ing a quantity of handkerchiefs, fans, trinkets, and other things.) The value of those things is §300 or !?400. Here is a piece of French lace worth £3 a-yard, also fans worth ?30 a-piece, other pieces of lace worth SO a yard, bracelets worth £3 IDs. and £4 vpiece. We had a large stock of these things on hand at the time of the fire. I did not go down at the time of the fire ; but went down the day after, when I saw a great deal of ashes in the base- ment; but I did not notice what they were from. To Mr. Gait.— Those things came into the store in August, 1857. I do not remember whether they were in the shop at the time the stock was taken. I do not remember when this piece of lace came into the shop. The prices I mentioned are the selling prices. I do not know the difference between the cost and selling price. Those are the selling prices in the stock book. I do not know what profit Mr. Lazare had on those goods. To Mr. Eccks.—I think that that is the .selling price that Mr. Lazare put down in the selling book. On looking again I do not think that those prices are the selling prices. To Mr. Cameron.— The reason I have for saying so is, that the cloak is not marked at the selling price. There is also a silk purse mentioned at ten shillings, and we have nothing of the kind sold in the shop so low as ten shillings. To His Lords7nj>.—A lace dress at £14 is at the cost price. Also gentle- men's dress shirts at §5 I think are at the cost price. I cannot tell gene- rally whether the prices mentioned in the bookare the selling or cost prices. Miss Baker, reculltd.— The entire stock in the stock book are at theccst price. To a Juror.— The item of X50 for perfumery is the cost price. ^'o Mr. Cameron. — Mr. Lazare took the invoices from the stock that came with the goods. On the 30th August he had all the preceding invoices for last September by him. Mr. Lazare put those prices on the stock, and car- ried it out turning the francs into pounds. It did not take him a very long time to do this, but I could not say how long. I know that those are the cost prices because I did not sell the goods at those prices. I could not say what the articles were sold at. The articles are ticketed in pounds in the shop. I do not know what this JC080 43. lid. means. Mr. James IIouGin.AnAN, sworn.— I was the porter at the Rossin House last winter. The fire broke out at half-past six in the evening. I was in the Hall. Mr. Joslin called me out. I saw the smoke coming out and 11 went up to Mr. Lazaro, and he came down and ^xe went into the phicc. I was there first, and sent for an axe to break in the door. I broke half of the door in. There were a good many people there, but we were the first who got there. It was a nice night, not being dark I saw many people get into the house trying to see where the fire was. A great deal of goods were carried out of the shop, by many people to Kae's saloon. I took some there myself, but do not kriow where the rest were. There was a good deal of confusion there. The cases containing the jewellery I could not speak of. I do not know what was done inside. I saw people carrying off" goods to Rae's saloon. I saw goods destroyed. They were picked up and carried to Rac's. The goods were destroyed by water from the engine. I do not think there were any carried out behind the store. To a Juror. — There were so'- ^oods scorched that I saw. After a hole was broken in the floor the flaL..>j3 came up. No fire from the basement came into the shop. To His lordship. — I believe the floor was nearly burnt through. I saw no fire in the shop. Mr. Richard Tinnixg. — I was at the fire from the commencement. I saw nothing but darkness when I went into the store. I saw goods taken out of the store and put on the sidewalk east of Rao's. The goods were in large packages. The most bulky things were piled there. I saw small things taken out of Rae's saloon that had been carried ihere. I saw them taken out of the shop, but did not know where they went to. A good deal of perfumery was taken pway. I saw one case broken myself. After the firemen came I went out of the shop. I saw the polico afterwards guarding the things on the sidewalk. To Mr. Cameron.— \ was in the shop at different times. The first time I went the smoke was so great that I could not stop there. I cannot say whether any of the things brought out of the shop were stolen or not. Mr. Si'ooNER. — I live in the T'oggla House, and was there at the time of the fire. I went there after the confusion was over. I saw several articles taken up west — some three or four apparent lots, perhaps more, west of the Rossin House. I do not know where they went to. I ordered one man to stop because it was my impression that they were taking them off". I noticed especially one gentleman's dressing case which I had to take by force from a fellow. To His Lordship. — I thought he was going to steal those articles. To Mr. Ecdes. — The man with the dressing case was trying to get away. There were many things destroyed. I saw the remains of many things destroyed, such as the remnants of bottles of perfumery, which I saw out- side the Rossin House. To Mr. Cameron. — I had but little opportunity of seeing what was going on as 1 was endeavouring to mind my shop. Of course I could not be positive that the men carrying away goods were going to steal them. 12 Major Joseph Gee. — I was at the fire from the commencement. I saw goods carried away ■west and east, and some lying on the sidewalk. There was much confusion then. I have been in the habit of going into Mr. Lazaro's shop, and can say that there was a very good stock of valuable goods and costly goods there. To Mr. Gait. — I was in the shop after the fire. There is an entrance to the llossin House west. I saw police there. To Mr. Eccles. — The police came after the goods had been carried away. Mr. Doyle. — I was at the fire shortly after it broke out. The police arrived after I arrived there. I saw the goods carried to Rac's and Smith's saloons, and a'so to a place on the other side of the house. I did not know where all the goods went to. I think there were many things carried away that were not carried back again. The day before the shop was well filled with goods ; and I saw after the fire many things brought into the shop that had been broken, such as broken bottles of perfur.ery. I heard one man in the crowd say that he had had enoughof perfumery to last him for a year to come. To Mr. Cameron. — I asked Mr. Lazare, whose business wo transact, where his goods were, and he could not tell me. He was half frantic. Some of the goods taken away were brought back. I saw them carry things to Smith's saloon and and found out where they carried other goods to afterwards. M;ss Sophia Baker.— I live on Adelaide street. I heard the alarm of fire on the occasion in question. I went to the corner of the Rossin House, went back for my sister and returned again. I saw policemen there. I saw a man pass the Theatre with an armful of boxes from Mr. Lazare's store. The boxes were larger than the one in Court. I did not see any other goods. To Mr. Cameroji.—Ile had from four to five boxes larger than this one He came from towards the shop door. I was standing at the entrance to the Hotel near Rae's saloon. I saw policemen there. JouN Buckley. — I was a cabman at the time of the fire. My stables are opposite to Lazare's. I ran down when I heard of the fire and saw smoke ; on going in I nad to run out again so great was the smoke. I saw the goods taken in all directions by a large crowd were present. I picked up one of those machines that goes on the ladies heads at the balls and gave it to Jimmy — he with the blaijk whiskers. Near my stables next day, I saw beautiful things (bracelets) into which I could not stufi" my hands. They were buried under the dung, and I left them there for a few days, Avlien I went back to look at them. Mr. Eccles. — To see if they would grow, I suppose. Witness continued.— Fortansitcly some time afterwards I thought of the '^iazare's, and about four or five days from the time of the fir I lays told 13 I him of the things I had found, and gave them up. The reason I did not take them away at first was that I was afraid that if I took them somehody would give me a knock on the head. To Mr. Cameron. — I recollected seeing such things in Mr. La/.are'a shop, for I used to look in to see the girls in the window, you know. When I told Mr. Lazaro of this, he said that he had lost such things, and he told me to bring them over, but I did not do so for four or five days — as I w^as afraid that I would get a knock if I took them. Mr. Lazare did not come over when I first told him about them. lie came over at last with three or four men, and just took them away without turning up more of the dung, to see if there were any more buried there. Mr. Lazare left the bracelets there for four or five days without insisting on getting them. To Mr. Eccles. — I saw white slippers falling about in the wet, at the time of the fire. Lawrence Lew. — I am engaged in the same line of business as Mr. Lazare. I live in 84 King Street East. I was usually in his shop three or four times a week before the fire, and usually looked at the stock. I formed an opinion then that the stock was worth £5000. I am familiar with those things — such as pefumery, bracelets, &c. I assisted in removing goods at the time of the fire. I did not see goods carried away. I picked up a piece of very valuable lace under Rae's saloon. I picked up a great deal of lace dresses, silks, perfumery, &c., out of the street and carried them up stairs. The police were there doing nothing however. It was a wet night, raining. JonN Rankin. — I lived in the llossin House at the time of the fire. I saw no policemen there. I was at the back of the house and saw no goods carried out there. I went up stairs and received the goods that the men brought up. I considered that all the made up goods were destroyed, such as opera cloaks, &c. I did not see any goods in the street. Alexander Notman. — I knew the plaintiflT's shop in November, and examined all the stock minutely. I thought that it was worth between ^5000 and jEGOOO. The general description of the stock was of a costly character. 1 was purchasing goods from Mr. Lazare. To Mr. Cameron. — I bought a pair of boots, a tie and shirt, and Mr. Lazare showed me the whole stock. To Mr. Eccles. — lie shewed me the stock because I am in the business mysalf, and also my wife is French and understands the things. Hon. Mr. Cauciion. — I have a consideiable knowledge of French articles, having been in Paris, and going through the shops there. I have often bought articles in Mr. Lazare's shop. I was in his shop on the last days of the last session. To Mr. Cameron. — I bought a twenty dollar handkerchief on that occasion Simon Sicotte. — I belong to llossin Brothers' firm. They deal in brace- lets, &c. I was at Mr. Lazare's when they were taking stock in August 14 and looked over the tilings with Mr. Lazaro. I thought the Btouk was worth i^2,500. Afterwp.rds I t^aw goods arrive from Fraiioo. I wan tlioro but once when Mr. Lyons checked off his goods, and that was ai'tor Au^tiMt. This was two months before the fire. The shop was well liUod. Tlioro were £5000 or more worth of stock in the shop the week before tlio llro. The appraisers did their work when I was present. They marked down the goods in the first column at the cost price in francs. The first column professed to fihow the value at invoice prices. There were some goodx put down in the appraisers valuation book by guess, and some at the diirnugoJ value. There are some little articles put down as I mention. A lot of jewellery at 150 francs was taken in a lump at the damaged valuo. 'J'lio real value was three times as much. To a Juror.— \ know the value of the goods. To Mr. JFccto.— Those who put it down knew what they were doing. A lot of buttons at 40 francs were also lumped, and were worth three tiiiioa as much. To Mr. Cameron. — Mr Lazare was present at the valuation tolling tho apprrisers the value of the articles. The buttons aud jewellery wore put down when he was out. The first column in the appraisers' book wuh tho cost price, and there was another colu.Tin for the per centago or daiuago. The buttons were not damaged and nothing was underrated from tlioir value. To Mr. Ecdes.—l saw the stock book in Mr. Lazare's hand. I saw somo of the invoices. Mr. Lyons, Fancy Dry Goodsman of 82 King Street West.— I only know the stock by seeing the stock through the window. But I think that \m stock was more valuable than mine, but not in the whole. Samuel Rossin". — T was in Mr. L.'u shop often before tho fire. I was there when they took stock in August. I saw the stock book then, iind think that the entries alluded to were the stock price, because I v/anted a shawl for £10, but Mr. Lazare showed me the invoice which was marked £12. Ai that time Mr. Lazare mentioned what his stock was worth, but ' I forget what it was. It was, however, thousands of pounds. laseortainod the amount cf tho stock from the stock botk after the fire. I M'as often in the store to see the new French goods. I have been in tho jewellery and perfumery business myself. And I think that Mr. Lazare's stock was very valuable -, worth from £5000 to £G000 before the fire. I was not at tho fire. When I arrived from Hamilton the fire was over. I did not. hoo any goods carried away. I was appointed appraiser by Mr. Lazare, and Mr. Callaway by tho Company ; 1 said that generally I could tell the valuo of tho goods. This is my valuation book, which I signed every evening when stock was taken. Mr. Davidson was there on behalf of the Iloyul, ami ho signed it also. The first column, I think at first, I did not uudcr«tand » 15 > . whether wo were to put the goods down at the damaged state or at their cost price, but afterwards I put down what the goods cost, and Mr. Lazarc helped us. But before we understood this we put down the goods in the damaged state in the first three pages of the book. The gross value of goods in their damaged state amounted to £2274 8s. 5d. The goods were not in good order, and I put them down at the damaged rate. To His WorsJtij). — The invoice prices of the first page would have amounted to more than the value set down. To Mr. Eccles. — The goods that were saved were placed in a private din- ing-room of which Mr. Joslin had tho key. There are duplicate keys to the room, of which the chamber-maid has one. No one else had entrance to the room, that I had knowledge of. I was in Mr. Lazare's shop after the goods were put back, and it looked a great deal more empty than be- fore tho fire. To Mr. Galt.~T\\Q franc was taken at 15d., or our quarter dollar. When I went into shop the goods were not all in the same places as before. The jewellery alluded to in the valuation book was damaged. It was not all gold — but some of it was. Mr. Francis CALiiAWAY. — I was appointed by the Companies to value the stock after the fire. This is my book. I heard what Mr. Rossin said. I suggested that we should have some definite value for the French franc, and so we made the value of it Is. 3d. There were some goods so dam- aged that we did not put them down at all : — of this description, I can particularize two fans, a head-dress, port-monnaies, &e., which did not amount to much value. I observed the quality of Mr. Lazare's stock be- fore the fire. 1 observed a difierence in the quality of the goods after the fire, all his goods were of a costly n ure. To Mr. Gait. — The articles we did not value could not cost more than |50. It was some time after the fire that I was in Mr. Lazare's store. I do not think his stock was reduced a half. Mr. Lazare remarked that there were ,a number of trinkets and a few silk dresses gone, which dresses all turned up before the valuation was complete. But he did not say there were $10,000 worth of goods lost. The prices put down in the first column al- luded to, were in the cost price, — with the exception of a few goods which JL'. Rossin told us the value of. I appraised all the goods, jewellery, and all, at the cost price. To a Juror.— The invoices of the jewellery were not forthcoming, and under these circumstances we had to consult with Lazare, and put down the value. To Mr. GaUf—Mr. Lazare did not give me at any time to understand that there were $10,000 or $12,000 worth of goods lost. No information was given by Mr. Lazare as to when the goods were brought into the store. I her.rd when the stock book was first produced, Mr. Rossin say that it was correct, and that he (Rossin) would swear to it. were fhto^°t'"^'~^^° ^''' '°^^ ""^"^^ "^"'^ ^'^ ^'^^"^ the goods that ZLlZ:^ ^; Z"""",''''' P>-oduced for us to conoh.de by that more goods were ost. The valuation commenced on the 18th of December, and 1 d.d not hear from him anything to the effect that he lost more goods. If mtst'^ "^ "'"'^ '''''''''' ^ ''""^^ *^" ^^^^^ ^ ^'•° -••'^'^t goods were by^t'hef valir^''"^ """^'^ *'" '^' °"'"^'' "^ ''P' '"'^ handkerchiefs only hafe f''diffi'V-^'"°^' misfortune befel me as befolMr. La.are, I could articles fT' ' V'"^ ' ^''''"P""" '^^ ^^« amount-but not of the articles-.f the goods were sold in small quantities for cash. I think it would be impossible in a retail business to give a detailed description of the loss as to quantity, quality, &c. Bat I think that the statement in question might be more full. Mr. Ca,neron.-U yon had bought thirty shawls, and had sold ten of them you could tell by what remained after the fire the exact number you had lost, and the same with regard to the dresses and other thind Jown „ „. J rio 1 v ' "'"^ /'^ "'° '^'"•- ''-"« <'f away sumo opera hooU. and ioJZ Zoa'!"' "'"' '""^^- ' ^"«'' r/'".rn.d 3rr. Sherwood was ther. 'T " ""' ""'^.«"'"<' ^^'ont.. Whr„ I 1 «e«^ to Mr. Uzaro and told him'of t ho nn" r f '," T'"' '^^''' *''" «^« -e^ ^. U.aro afterwards selt f;'! t!! "' '"'"" ''"' ''« "-'"^^ of i^^xei'n!;;'!;:;;^^ "^czi::::"; '"" r'' ' '°^^ -^^ •-> ^-j« the nh.rn. I „, ;„ ,., ^,.^^ ^ ;^^^; '--- ten n^inutes after J heard nocfon with their Innurance busine ' 1^2,^ ^"i' ^"' ''^^e no con- the valuation list It is a ..pHW 1 '""''*''^ carefully throujrh acquainted with the ry ^I'tlT T, "^'r"'? ^'"^'^ ''''- ' - saved from fire according th Xuion 7 '"^'r ' ''" ^'^"'^^ ™ goods with the stoek were old good. ^^''- ^ ^'""^ '^'^^ ^^ the since May. I «aw goods in M y Zi aw tl " " ^'"^ *" ^"«"«' "- t orefore I know his stoek w s p:^^„v oW Tlf''" *^' ^'•''^ -'-'=-' «ilk lor instance that cnme from our M n T\ t ''*''' '' ^''"' '''" ^''"ck was another piece with o r marT on t tI ''"f"?' '" ""''' '^''-» La^are. and which I afterwards recol, -1 1 •^'°'^' "'"''''' ^ «"'J *» >^r. thanX5. There were alJoIolerdr is :hi:i:r^^ " .""^^-^ '" -- amounted to perhaps £10. I fancy th„t £50 wnM T^""'"'"^' """^ ^^'''"'^ '^ur shop. The remainder I re !rle as o^! k ^"°''' '^"'"^ °"' ^^ by general appearance. I am a ^ Ik h Moffl m' " '^";"'*' "'"•'^^ ^"* agents for the Phoeni. I did not st ,1 lie, " iV ?.' ^^''" "'^ n^uch It was insured for. '^^ °"^ ^"^■'«' liow The Court then adjourned at six o'clock until hnlfnoof • x, . morning,--IIis Lordship first givin/the in .1 "'*''' ^""°^'"S regard to their conduct fn such cZ: ' ' '''" '''''''''' --'- - Iho Court met at half-past nine o'clock Ii;« Tn.u • Hogg ,,.; ., . „ t: ,. „ ' th ' " , ""^'^ ^'""'•" '^°""»>'1'> "•■"neS 23 Mr. DAViiiSON.-I nm Inspector for the l{o),iI Insurunce Company I recollect tl.o fin,, which I wiw not pronent at until thr next mor..infi when I met Mr. I.n/,,ne. I firnt iM,uire.l the c.iuso of the lire, nnd he showed me the hole in the floor, nn.i told n.o that the fire originated in the hot-air Btovo. I a.sked Mr. La/.are if there was an^shing hmm, and ho Haid " no," diHtin.tly. I also saw myself that nothinfi was burned. I M -nt into the cellar with Mr. Lazare ; that i.s where the Bti,vo wan. No ^ood8 were there, and Mr. Laz;iro said nogoous wore kept theid to my itumiry 1 Haw no remains of burnt sillc or cotton, and Mr. La/.are said that he did not think that anything had been burnt. The cellar appeared to be altogether empty, for even the remnants of goods were not to bo seen. The upper shop appeared to be nearly empty ; nearly all the goods had been taken away. In the shop up stairs I saw two shirt collars, and h -me portmon- naies and pictures, which appeared to be trampled on the xvet lloor and partially burnt, being a little singed. I examined these arti( os. I asked where the rest of the goods were, and went with Mr. T-a/.aro up stairs to where thej were kept, and Mr. Joslin opened the door for us. On goinR in I saw the goods lying about, but I did not see anything burnt a- injured by fire. I was ten minutes there. Mr. Lazaro asked how ho ;id better proceed. Mr. Murray told him the usual course to follow, and Mr Howard told Imn the same thing. Mr. Lazare asked what way was that, u ho wae aiixious that he should get the goods ready for the Chri.^tmas market. The course was to appoint two appraisers to value the goods— oi.' to bo appointed by the Company, and the other by Mr. Lazaro. Mr. ,azaro assented, and the two gentlemen were appointed as already mentioned. Ihis IS the valuation book. I was present all tho time. Mr. Lazar- said on the second day that ho was afraid some things wore stolen ; he di 1 not say anything the first day. The shop was taken first, at the request o. Mr. Ilossin. Mr. Lazare did not make any observation when the valuaion was completed. To Mr. J-JccIes.-thQ cellar was lit partly by the hole in the floor. he burnt boards had been removed from the place they had been in. I ^ w burnt boards in the cellar. I did not remove them. There were 8(„ o pieces of charred wood in the cellar. I did not remove anything. I d.d not see what was under any of those things. To a Juror.— I was merely there to look on, 3Ir. Lazare valued some of the things for us when we could not value them otherwise. James WooDiiofSE.— I am in the Customs department. I attend to the entries. I have the entries of goods imported to Mr. Lazare through the Custom h.,u8e between the Lst of August aud 31st December. Amount i:400. Mr. Lazare.-I am the pi, intifi' in this suit. These invoices are tho* original ones I put in for this case. I cannot i mber whether the goods I imported from Trance aii came through the p.at of Toronto or not. I 24 cannot say ^vhere the goods of this invoice of the 24th of July were entered. Nor tho next one. Nor the next one. I canr.ot say at which port any of these goods were entered. I do not remember whether I entered any goods a any other than Toronto. I cannot remember whether I entered goods at Montreal, K.ngston, Hamilton, or any other phxce. This is my stna- ture, but I cannot say whether I have the invoices or not. I declin°e to answer any question about the Custom IIou.se. pof'of^roronTo7^' *''''* "'' ''"''' '''"° "^ ^^' °'''"^' ^°" '"^'"''^ ^* ^^'' Mr. Fcclcs.—Yoa need not answer that question. Mr. Cameron appealed to his lordship. im IMp said that the plaintiff need answer no question that would afterwards eliminate himself. Witness conUnved to Mr. Cawcron.-l cannot tell whether those goods or any portion of them are mentioned in the invoices. Or those goods or those mentioned in this invoice, dated the IDth October ; or this one 'lOth September ; or this one 21st August. I cannot remember whether any of these goods are m the invoices. I cannot say whether I entered goods at Montreal, Kingston, or Hamilton. I cannot tell where all the goods in my shop were entered at. I cannot tell where all the goods mentioned in the stock book and invoices were entered. Those entered in this book were entered some at different times and some at the same time. I took stock in August when all those entries were made. I did not make them all on S3Cond thoughMiU after the fire. I took my stock prices lower than cot and therefore did not carry it forward. I carried the balance over at a lower rate. The different per centage for sales and makin<. the cui- rancy were added. I have the cost price, and have added fifty per cent Those entries were all made after the fire. I cannot tell where I entered my goods. I put away the entries after I received them. To Mr. Eccles.-lho^G invoices are the real cost of the goods This is the account current sent by Rheims and Co. up to 31st December and agrees with the invoices sent by them. Those invoices contain the real price I paid Kheims and Co. for the goods. Mr. Maulson directed me how to make out this ledger. No goods went out of the shop from the 31st if any to the time of the fire, unless what I sold. The day book contains a correct entry from day to day of what I sold. That stock book is correct The stock up to the 3Ist August is entered in the ledger. The value of my stock the night before the fire was about i:0,000. I was there at the fire and saw a great quantity of goods carried off. The statement I sent in to the Insurance Company contains my exact loss. I hav,« -.t concealed or disposed of any of those goods so as to produce the deficiency ' I know nothing about any of the missing goods. The value of the contents of this small box at cost price would bo C>00, and I missed a great deal of goods 25 of this sort. Indeed most of my loss fel! upon this sort of goods. After the goods went into the Rosein House dining room, I missed a great quan- tity of fancy jewellery. Tiie Insurance Company took charge of the goods when they were placed there. _ 'Ih Mr. Camcro7i.—1h.\s is the account from llheims & Co. I have the mvoices of those goods, and here are real invoices. I do not rememler jhere the invoices of those goods are. I looked for them but could not lind them. They are of no use to me, and I did not keep them. To a Juror.— I could not say whether the goods were taken from the i^Z.'T"' '''' ^''"" ^^"^ '*'''*' ^"^ ^ ^°°^^ *'»"* they were missing. The >-0,000 I mentioned was the cost price, adding 50 per cent to the Paria prices. Mr. Cameron.-Ax^ those the invoices which you took to the Custom liouse to pass the entry ? JftVnm.-Those invoices were of no use to me, and therefore I did not keep them. Mr. Woodiiouse,— These invoices were not entered at the Custom House —as they are not stamped with the Custom House stamp. Hon. Mk. Cameron then addressed the jury for the defence. He said that his learned friend, Mr. Eccles, in opening the defence had directed at- tention to the matter at issue between the plaintiff and the Insurance Com- pany ; ho would therefore pass by the first and second pieces of the case and come to the consideration of what after all were the most important issues of the case, namely, whether the plaintiff had given to the Insurance Company all the information that they were bound to do by tlieir policy and whether there had been any fraud or false swearing perpetrated by the plaintiff. He concurred with the learned counsel for the plaintiff, when he said that an Insurance Company ought never to come into court and resist the payment of a claim, unless they had very good and sufficient grounds for doing so. But at the same time, he would not go so far as his learned friend went, and notwithstanding all that ho said to the contrary, he (Mr. C.) could assure his learned friend that the Ph«?nix Insurance Com- pany here never resisted a claim made on them for the last sixteen years. And the Royal Insurance Company was also prompt in its payment, and It was not without due consideration th-.t they now came before the court to resist the present claim ; and he left it to the jury to say whether the Insurance Company had not acted wisely in bringing the matter into court as they had done. With regard to the giving to the Insurance Company due information by the plainliff.-such had not been done, and there was no doubt that such information might have been given, for it was stranee that when stock had been taken on the Slst of August, and when entries had been made by the plaintiff, of the monies he received for stock down to the t.n.e ol the ii.o, and when they knew what stock remained after the fire, that the plaintiff in the end could not say what articles he had lost ~i 2G On lookinj^ over the sale book, he saw that one-half of the goodn had been put down as lost, but no information would be given as to the particular kind of ^oods that had been lost, which might easily be done, as supposing that the plaintiff had said that he had fifty silk dresses before the fire, and that after it he had only twenty, his lost in that particular would at once be arrived at. And why could not this plan be pursued with all tiie stock.— But no such inforniatian had been given to the Insurance Company, and that was one of the reasons, why they now came forward to resist the claim. Leaving this branch of the case, he would come to the next which treated of fraud. The learned counsel for the plaintiff had said, the effect of the affidavit already alluded to, would be to charge Mr. Liizare with per- jury. But he (Mr. C.) could not help that— the responsibility of such a charge did not rest upon him, but upon the man who could at one time make a declaration to show that he was entitled to £3009, while it could bo shown that his claim never amounted to £800. And not only were these good grounds fur believing that there had been false statement, but also the evidence of JMr. Lazare, which the jury would bear in mind, that Mr. Lazare could not remember where his goods came from— whether they had been entered at Montreal, Hamilton, or Kingston, or any other place, or in fact any tiling about them. Likewise, the jury would also remember, that be could not tell where the invoices of the goods were, and a great many other important matters. But the moment that his learned friend, Mr. Eccles, asked him anything, he could remember everything,. Now he had heard a great deal about the stealing of the goods from the Rossin House, and how easily it was to do so, since the goods were valuable, and a great deal of valuable articles would fit into a small box. All he had to say to that was, that such might be the case— but if so, then the whole stock of the plaintiff of £5000, would fit upon a single shelf, and therefore it was ridiculous to bring witnesses to speak of the empty look of the shop after the fire, for the plaintiff might have all his valuable stock stowed away in a very small space. And then again, how strange it was that when Mr. Lazare, the plaintiff, had been making such a great cry about the quantity of goods that had been stolen from him, he did not at once take away the articles that were hid in the dung-hill, when he was told about them. How strange it was that if any man had stole them that no man came to take them away again. Did the jury think that any one had secreted those ar- ticles then, in order to give a colouring to the case ? And indeed, what else could any one think under the circumstances of the case. But apart from all this, had any evidence been shown that £3000 worth of goods had been stolen, as had been alleged? Taking into consideration the pieces of lace, and silk, and all the other things that had been mentioned as likely to be stolen or damaged, the sum total would only amount to £1,30. And did the jury for one moment suppose that no account of the precious goods 27 in the shop had been kept hj Mr. Lazare, and that he could not tell whe- ther a valuable lace dress or any of those valuable handkerchiefs liad been sold in the day or not. There was no doubt that he could. But at all events, there was no doubt that a wrong had been committed in arrivlixr at tlie sum total of the stock-either a smaller value had been put upon "the stock, or else a wrong valuation had been made which would benefit La- zare, and it would be for the jury to determine which. Then, it was not said or attempted to be proved, that the loss sustained by the plaintiff had been by fire, and could it be possible that so great a loss could have occur- red at such an early hour by the goods being stolen ? There was another branch of this part of the case to which he would allude. It had been shown that the plaintiff defrauded the Custom House ; and would not he defraud the Insurance Company. But Mr. Eccles says that we have nothin- to do with that. However, the jury had agreat deal to do with it, for a man who could perjure himselfout of court, would not scruple to do so in court; and if ho made a false statement in regard to any portion of his goods, would he not do so in regard to them all. IIow could there bo such a loss by fire as that alleged by the plaintiff, under the circumstances under which It broke out ? Nearly all the goods taken from the house were taken to Rae's saloon, except those taken by Mr. Smith to his saloon, which the plaintiff's counsel made so much about ; a little went west it is said, and a few articles were taken across the street, and Mr. Lazare said some articles had been taken from the Rossin House dining-room. But have £3000 worth of goods been really taken away or destroyed in this manner. Where are the invoices of this large quantity of goods, that we may at once see how much has been taken away, and the exact value of them, and in fact arrive at the conclusion that the loss has taken place. The jury would re- member that Mr. Lazare refused to say at what port any of his goods were entered, and were they now to place confidence in the assertion--so easily proved, but so much avoided— that the plaintiff had sustained this loss. He knew the jury too— they were all business men, and he would not trou- ble them farther in the matter, but leave the matter in their hands as be would in the hands of any honest man. He did not care how such equivo- cal evidence came to be given by the plaintiff, but now that it was given, he thought that it should meet with the full consideration of the jury. In conclusion, ho would say that any one who had heard the evidence from the first, and who had followed the case, could not but feel assured that in resisting the payment of the plaintiff's claim, under the circumstances, and in bringing the matter into court, the Insurance Companies had acted wisely, and done right. Mr. Ecci.es then addressed the jury on behalf of the nl:iint!ff. Tin did 80, he said, with a great deal of diffidence, not because ho feared anything that had been said by the learned counsel who had preceded him, but be- 28 cause he saw on the jury men who, from their position, might 1)0 )ir..)udi- ced against his client, and in iixvor of the Insurance Company. 'J'lio 'jury had been told by learned counsel that the case only assumed tvvc Hlia'pos ; but they had been told wrong. His Lordship could tell them that it had assumed a third shape; and indeed it might enter into the mhuU of tlio .jury that his client might possibly make an oversight in his caliMiIalion, and it would be for the jury to determine the consequences of tiiis third branch of the case. All that he could tell the jury was, that liis clinnt liad given the Insurance Companies all the information that it was usual to Kivo on such occasions. Before going any farther, he would quote from the trial already alluded to in Lower Canada, as the results in both caHPH wore the same, and as the jury in that case took an independent stand, In the hope they would also in this. Mr. Gait objected against the learned counsel reading anything from tho trial in question, as he would not have the opportunity of commeutinj; on it. His Lordship coinciding with him, ^ Mr. Eccles dropped the subject, ind continued : When the flro ocoiirrod his client went to Mr. Maulson to know how he would act, and hogivvo him three printed forms, Nos. 1, 2, 3, the first of which had annexed to it the three conditions brought in question ;n chis suit. Now ue contended that his client had given under the circumstances, the same information that had been given over and over again, and which had again and again booa held sufficient. Mr. Lazarc gave the Insurance Company hia stock hook, the invoices of his stock, tho quantity of goods that had been missing after the fire ; and what more could he do ? After the Company had been applied to for the amount of loss sustained by the plaintifi", they sent into him a equisition pointing out the conditions of tho policy, and requo4itig a statement of stock disposed of from the taking of stock until tho Jlr.», also the original invoices, all stock books, and other books of account in tho business, and a detailed statement of all the goods that had boon miiising after tho fire. Now such a request was, to the last degree, unreason ablo, and one which never had been asked before. Even the agent of tho Inour- ance dimpany, Callaway, said that it would be utterly impossiblo to givo such a statement, in his own case where ho never entered his ovoryday cash sales in his books, and was it not unreasonable to ask Mr. La/iu'o to give such a statement, who never entered his cash sales in his bookH. Hut supposing that such a statement had been given to them, it would bo of no use to them. Mr. Lazare did all that was usual to do in such casoH. With regard to the certificates, all ho would say that it was a very atrango pro- ceeding ; first thing, got one from Mr. llobinson, and that not suiting they got one from Mr. Brunei, and besides this there were three gontloij'on who said Mr. Lazare's loss has been £3000, but that will not HiitiHfy tho Company. Tho conditions of the policy had been complied with as far us 1 1)0 jii'cjudl- ■. 'J'lio jury twc k!iiij)Os ; that it liiid niiulN of* tlio calculation, al' tJjiN tliird U cli(MU Imd iHuiil top;ivo to fVOMl tlio 1 oiVHCH wore tand, in tlto ng from tho mting on it. ro oeoarrod logavo liini od to it tlio :ondod tlmt nution tluit again boou Htoult book, isfling after 3on applied into iiioi tt quoNtinp; a ilr.», also unt in tlio on mitming oaNonablo, tho Innwv- bio to give everyday Lazaro to lollH. Hut d bo of no *0H. With 'tin go pro- iting tliey ?ontloii«on 1 as far ns 29 fraud r,rH "'^'Mr\f"'"' '"' '''■"' "'^>- ^"-S'' "- VlLiLia. cZnt^ J V J A / ''' r"™'""^ ^^ ^'^*^^^ ^-^-^ '^"^ f-ud had been hon i , ' "■'"'' ''" ^^"■™'"' "°« '"-''' "°t Signed by a magistrate then they sa.d we won't look at these papers at all, we don'f want then - we want books, not paper. We want the books of the fir.n. But tl Com- gi en up, and hey had come back mutilated and full of erasures Who ja to know who might have access to those books when once they we en happened, and ought to prove that no Insurance Company have a rtht to th books of a firm. The jury seemed tired, he could not help remarking but be could not help that. He had a right to expect justice. anTle dfi not care f.r their twisting and turning about, he had a i-ight t^ expe t jus- tice, andno rnatter how tired they might seem, be would discha ge h s duty to h,s chent. The former trial in Lower Canada lasted five dayf th one had only lasted two days. To resume. The jury had plentfof ev dence as to the value of the stock for almost all the witnesses pL of Mr. Samuel Rossia had done so, so had also Major Gee, Lcv/n tnan Ro«s,n's clerk, Miss Pitt and Lyons. There were in all nine witne ses' who deposed to the value of the stock. Besides there were theTn ! c s and yet in spite of all this evidence, the jury were asked to find that ^ took wasof loss value than that set upon it by all these witnesses. But 1 e had nothing o do with that. The jury might say that the goods we e overvalued, but it was his duty to say that the goods had been pnn-ed tTb of such a value, and he would like to see the man who had come forward to prove that they were of less value than they were set down at. No man had been brought forward by the Insurance Company to prove that the goods ™ of less value. The Co npany only aea/t in'prob' UHty ^ t L facts. In thanex pace, there were eight witnesses brought for;ard to shew tha the goods had been taken away out of the shop, and he would put It .0 the jury whether it was not possible that in the darkness of the evening and hurry attending the fire, twenty men could not have walked off witli boxes such as the one that had been shown, containing $60 worth of stuif. witfiout being perceived, and also, could not the goods have been taken from the dining-room by the servants who had a pass key to it Mr. GalL—Oiily ono servant had a puss key to that room. Mr. Fcdes.-U it not possible that the goods.were taken in this wav • and notwithstanding all that the defendant had said, he said that it was the lii I I ! 11 80 way in which the goods has gone. Let the jury now turn to th. evidence brought forward by the defendant; and in the fi pZ t at of th pohce Al the police swore that they watched the thin Jo w that Shi ^on^r S^ *''". '^^""' ""'''' «^^"- eastward; U^l'^* Chief of l'ol.ce,-Sherwood, who.se evidence was particulirlv fill« u assurance, swore that no goods had been taken ai; uX t of" fire Now was a man who could swear in that loose way to be bo ieved rhe.,ury hewas sure, would value such evidence at what it 1'™^ Let them look back at the instances in which the nolir f engaged, and they would see that at circus Hots Lp^^'^^t;^::^;::" could be destroyed, and great commotion raised and vet the n^l? , were aH present, could not identify a single persin tl^l^^ ^^^ "^^^ not. Let the jury look at the late riot in the city, when a hotpl I.V^ , attacked and the police who were also present coii; noV den% 'sinTe rioter. But it was useless to enumerate cases. They were too IIA ^ And was it possible that the men who could identify nothinl) r^"' their duty to do so, come forward ana on this :::^::^^Z' r!^ cles had been stolen at this fire. It was absurd to dwell on it iiJi the face of all the Chief's evidence, Mr. Smith Jl^sZllJlT '° eight large boxes of goods to his own store, with:::;V nt ere\ni: Chief, who swore that he was the first one present at the fil k T ! according to the evidence given had not been^here un i onfe tim^ J And this is the defendant's evidence we are commentlg on " T eTatab * Mr Saunders swore that goods had been put down in ^he stre and he could ask the jury whether it was possible to prevent a hungry" -oJfrom walking off with part of them. Mr. Costello could walk off with Talkin^^ «ticks without the knowledge of the police. The learned counsdw n' hrough the evidence atsome length, and alluded to what the learned coun s had said in regard to fraud. He said he could not sufficiently condemn the coiirse taken by the Insurance Company, in producing those Co^ctto show tliat Mr. La.are had been guilty of fraud. Such ch^xrges on e pi of the Insurance Company, were most unjust, and sunk them /ff lowest depths of degradation. Was every ma'n ^o came o t ts a ! Contpa-. , for the amount c: his policy to be put in the jury box Trd tk whether he ever did anything which he ought not to have'^one? K so the Company should insert a clause in their policies statins thnt L m require the holder of the policy to show that^l' hil^dTll ^ eLT' at the Custom House. But supposing, for the sake of argument thlt M, Lazare had smuggled those goods. What was the differfnce o t w rance Company. To d. so was certainly MTon'' entries. Were they true or were thev f.i \ ."" ^>-«'-eKheims &Co.'s Bhewn on the part of the plliS d'ht r* , w?""« ''^'''^"^^' '"^^ ^^<>- t'^e jury's hand without fu'rthe emark E^f •''"" ''''' ^'« '''' - that the defendant had not sworn t^Mh ^f ?'"'.^^"ing down he remarked than the plaintiff said it wl ^'a 'n .' ^'r'^^'^^'^.k -- of less value lazare's shop was empty blre the hre ''H"'^''!''' ^« «'-- that Mr. who swore as to the value of the irorlr ""'' '^^''^ witnesses in the shop before the fire. ZTtlTJZr"'''f- '^'" ^'"^'^^ --« ^''^J they gone to ? These wer'^a" s f^ the T "T ""• '"' '"'^'-^ regard to the bracelets that were found t T ^^ " "''''^"° «"• ^^^th learned friend had gone so f^rTs to sa! , l ^ T^"'''"' ""'^ ^''^^^'^ ^is could inform the jury that when M lT ''^^^^^"^.^'^ »'^ the plaintiff; he to him and told l^im'of them "ifd LZ e\ rn'. •' *'^"'' '^ -- and acquaint the Insurance Company with th.^n ?/^ SO at once they were immediately afterwards taken 1 T' '"'^ ^' '^'^ ^«' «"d deducted from the lo'ss already Vet' r':ind f!!' "^"-""^ ^^^^ Lazare was in a terrible state of e.citene„t'at1 - ^'''^^^ ^''"^^ ^^r. ing what he was doing. With the eTe " ', f !"' ^°'''^^', ''"^ ''^''^^y know- the hands of the jury. """'^' '^^ ^^'""^'^ J°ave his case in The Jl-doe then charged the furv ITp b^m *i considerable importance with le^nrd to tl^ , ""''' '"'^'^'^ ^«« «»« o*" taken up a considerable tC- S, t '''''"'''' '^ '''' P'''"'^tifr, had I^eing only right that it Z^^:r:^;^^Z2:Zf "l^C'^-^Tr '' things to consider : first, the extent of thn J. ff , ^ J"'^ ^""^ two the statement made by he pontiff of f ^^ ' ^''' ' ''''''^' ^^^ther pany had a right to deCnd ' j J "'"" '"'"' ' °'"' '^^ *^« C""*- the Company-^ polic/oTIbi; ^ a\' d^l^ f^thr ^\'^ ^^"^^ ^^ what was therein set forth was reisonlb Zd tw'^^ Tf T'^''" while on this subject, that he had tried severil T' , "^ "''" ""^^ and could say that in many cases it wn, . f '"''" '' '^' P''^^^"', .oca, ,.„, ,.„ ,„„, s„.e ™„,.a,.., "e;r::;'X:K ra ra^ : It .' 1 h ;i Ml 82 note kept of the articles sold by each clerk, and in this case it would of course be still easier to give a detail of the loss. It is contended that a more detailed statement could have been given in this case. Now the jury would see the allegation from the nature of the evidence given in. The Insurance Coi nany say that the information given by the plaintiff was not what they wanted. Now it was for the jury to say whether the state- ment demanded by the Insurance Company was reasonable. If they were satisfied that the information given in was all that could reasonably be re- quired, then tliey had nothing to do but to consider the amount of the plaintiff's loss. If they found that it was not reasonable information, then they would find that for the defendant. Again, by the invoices the stock was set down atX2,83G in August ; and to substantiate this, several women are called who helped the plaintiff lo take stock and afterwards had recourse to the books in which the entries were made, and saw that the figures were correct as they called them out to Mr. Lazare. The invoice of July amounted to 3,043 francs, which it was said was not catered in the stock taken in August. This was a fact for the jury to determine on. Mr. Cameron would show this invoice to his lordship on the book. Els Lorchhip.—li is entered as $276 ; but it is probable that it was not taken into consideration at the time. There is another invoice on the 24th July, from the same place, amounting to 1,732 francs. There was also another from Henderson ; and one on the 15th August, amounting to 11,704 francs; another, dated Octcber 13th, 3,076 francs; and another in September for 4,939 francs. All these invoices are said to be made out from the original invoices by which the goods were checked. There ia also a statement from the house in Paris, showing the amount of goods which were bought there, amounting to 72,000 francs, which sum includes all these invoices. Now the plaintiff' could tell the value of the goods he lost by these invoices. But it was for the jury to say whether the informa- tion afforded the Insurance Company of his loss was in accordance with the conditions of the plaintiff's policy, by which he was bound to furnish the Insurance Company with copies of all invoices, and books and papers in the matter, that would enable the company to arrive at aoorrect esti- mation of the loss the plaintiff sustained, or to say whether such a request was a reasonable one. The question as to the value of the goods then came up for consideration ; and of course all the goods that had been stolen, from the taking of stock in August up to the time of the fire, would be included in the sum, which might fairly be set down as Mr. Lazare's loss. No doubt of it. The Company will have to bear that loss ; and that was always an objection in such cases as the present. And then, every merchant who comes into Court in such cases as the present is sure to have been making 33} per cent, on his stock, yet it was somewhat strange that failures did sometimes occur among those very men, in spite of the 33^ per i case it would of contended that a e. Now the jury ;e given in. The the plaintiff was whether the state- Ic. If they were reasonably be re- de nuiount of the information, then nvoices the stock is, several women irds had recourse t the figures were invoice of July ;ered in the stock ne on. I the book. le that it was not Foice on the 24th There was also t, amounting to ; and another in to be made out jcked. There is amount of goods ich sum includes of the goods he ,her the informa- accordance with jound to furnish ooks and papers at a correct esti- r such a request ' the goods then s that had been if the fire, would as Mr. Lazare's t loss ; and that Lnd then, every t is sure to have hat strange that te of the 33^ per 88 cent, they were making. The mode generally adopted on the occasion of ires by no means showed the nett loss a merchant sustained ; but, at the ame t.mo. was there a better means of arriving at the loss ? T hat wa th quesfon WlH,n goods are sold for cost, the articles disposed of ar merchant as Mr. Lazare to arrive at an idea of his loss, unless by adopting h usual plan And on the whole, perhaps, there was no better^plan t Ian the ne adopted. The strong points in the plaintiff's case were the evidence oh women, and that of those persons who were in the shop shortly be- It is si tT r ^"'' *''''"""y "' *" '^'' ^'"^'"^ ^f t''« «'"«k ^' that time. « ds in it /!i "l 7" """^ ^? '"'? ^'"P '^•^^ ^' -^^^^ '« *°" t^'« value of the fo ^0 to t . ^ Jook.ng round and it might be the case ; but it was a matter them r n t'^T ? '' T '" ''"" '' "^^ ^^^^'''^'- ^^'^ '^-^^"^^ -tisfied tha thet ^ '" T^ ^"'S' "•"'^""'^ '^^'^ ^''"^ ^<^«'r«^<^J ^y fire, but ha the largest amount of them had been stolen. To meet this, it is said toTen^Th fT'^'T ^'' ''^" ^^^'^'^ "" P^^-"* *'- g°«J« f-m being ttat J . ?," Ff " ''^ ^'^" °" *'" S^°"°^ -'-'y - t'^^ -'-ing, an! that goods to that large amount could not have been stolen. And to meet this again, ,t is advanced large quantities of those valuable goods mir^ht whToh t^ r '"u^''' ^'''' "'"'-'^ ^^^ ^''^ ^'^'^'bited in court. a°nd which, though small, contained very expensive articles. And here he rnight remark that the jury were not told what proportion of the g od at soirof" 1 ' *'^°', "''' ^"P^-*"^^" ^'^^° J^^^"^^^ «- witness'say valu.hr T, «°:^^^^'•« ^''^'"^^^J^- --^ others say that they were all Sniff LtVff," ^'''^''''^^ Custom House below their value-the plaintiff ays that they were the true value of the goods. And here he Court Za.t!r:t'V'''' '* ''''' ""' ''^''^^^ --^^ —-to Court and say that he did not know at what port any of his goods were entered. Either these declarations were true or ilUse. If they were f^lse It was not for the plaintiff to say that it was dishonorable in the Insu anc^ Company to drag these matters to light. The dishonor did not lie on the Insurance Company but on the man who gave occasion to the charge • a! If a man was the occasion of dishonor being cast upon him, he could not T, rr^e . '? "' '.' ^'' ^^^^^"^••^We in any one to cast it upon him And the defendojrit was right to ask the jury to take these things into con- sideration I the plaintiff had the amount of goods he alleged, and then sustained the loss he alleged, it was for the jury to find a verdict for him. But ^f the jury found that there had been any false swearing in the matter, tlen they would find for the defendant. There was no use of false delicac; m .ho ma.tcr. _ lie dil not think that the Company would make a statement that was not right, or that they would take an unwarranted advantage It 34 is quite evident that a dlfTorenco of X2,000orX,1,000 could not occur unless there had been something wronrr. Jf, therefore, the jury found that the value of the goods had not been set down right, they would find for the defendant— that is, that they had been set down at £0,000 when they were they were only worth X4,000. Mr. Kcdes said tliat that was a matter of fact for the jury to determine. lli>s Lordship.~Oi course he left it entirely to the jury. And he rt-ould leave it to them to say whether the goods removed had been dama-ed in the manner described. It had been said that one of the servants had a skeleton key, and no doubt the person who had this key rvas a person in whom strict confidence could be placed. A-rain, with r«..rard to the invoices, the jury had a right to see that all the invoices were correct; but at the same time, notwithstanding tiiat Lazare had dono wror-^ ho was also entitled to recover. At the same time, if Rheims & Co. sent false invoices with their goods, with the view of cheating the revenue of the country, he could say that the law of the land should not be made sub- servient to enable them to recover any claim in which their illec-al practices were concerned. Now he could not say that this was a matter°to be taken into consideration, and he could not say that it was a matter not to be taken into consideration-as Mr. Lazare might still have ha.' the full value of the goods in the invoices that had been called in question. The jury would now retire and take the matter into consideration. The jury retired, and after a short absence returned, and before bein-» allowed to give their verdict the plaintiff's attorney said, "stop " my Lord' *' wo will take a Non-suit "-which having been registered, the jury were then dismissed. "^ LAZARE V. THE PIiaLXIX INSUllAXCE CO. This action was precisely similar ■<> the one reported above • the evidence taken in tho latter case being read in this case from His Lordship's notes. The jury having retired and being allowed to hand in a scaled verdict- when the Court met in the morning, the verdict having been read, proved as follows : "We find a verdict for tho defendant." >Ct'S3(, IS9C3 /?5g x?oer, H