HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0038 and id is 1 raw text is: HODGSON V. GLOVER
parish of Hornchurch, which it was alleged that the vicar bad been immemorially
bound to repair; by means of which swine and other cattle broke in and rooted up
the tombstones and dirtied the porch of the church, and the paths leading to it; to
the nusance of the inhabitants of the parish. At the trial at the last assizes there
was a verdict for the defendant, which
Marryat now moved to set aside and to have a new trial, upon the ground that
the verdict was against all the evidence. He admitted however that he had not been
able to find any instance where the Court had granted a new trial in case of a misde-
meanor where the verdict was for the defendant: but he contended that this was in
effect only a trial of a civil right, namely, the liability to repair, though in the form
of an indictment ; there being no other mode of trying the right in a case of this sort ;
and it was in ease of the party charged, and to prevent a multiplicity of actions.
That fifty years ago the Court would never grant a new trial after a verdict of
acquittal in cases of penal actions, informations in nature of quo [316] warranto,
and indictments (a) ; but since then there have been instances of new trials granted
in the two former cases(b). But he admitted that in the 24 Geo. 2 the Court had
refused to grant a new trial on an indictment against the inhabitants of a parish for
.non-repair of a road, where there had been an acquittal.
Lord Ellenborough C.J. It is very clear that you may indict the defendant again
if the fences have continued out of repair since the last indictment; and that is much
better than for us in a case of such minor consequence to make a precedent of so much
importance, which may affect other cases of misdemeanors.
Per Curiam. Rule refused.
HODGSON against GLOVER. Tuesday, May 7th, 1805. Upon an insurance on profits,
valued at 4001., where the plaintiff declared as for a total loss, and it appeared
that after a shipwreck by which many of the slaves,-on the piofits of whom the
insurance was made, were lost, but the remainder reached the market, and were
there sold ; and it did not appear what profit was made of them, or whether if all
had arrived any profit would have been made; though it was found that the
produce of those-who were sold did not give a profit upon the whole adventure;
Held that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover. Note.-The whole adventure
was a voyage from Liverpool to Africa, and from thence to the West Indies ; but
the profits were only insured from St. Vincent's, (after the ship's arrival there,)
to her last port of discharge in the West Indies.
In assumpsit upon a policy of insurance, tried at Guildhall, before Lord Ellen-
borough C.J., a verdict was found for the plaintiff for 2001. subject to the opinion of
the Court on the following case. The plaintiff, the owner [317] of the ship Monta
Lambert, in October 1801 dispatched her from Liverpool for the coast of Africa with
a cargo of various goods, with which she was to purchase slaves, and proceed therewith
to the West Indies, and there dispose of the same in the usual manner. The ship
arrived on the coast of Africa, and there bartered her outward cargo for slaves, with
which she sailed in May 1802 for the West Indies, and arrived at St. Vincent's on the
30th of June in that year. The plaintiff being informed of the ship's arrival at St.
Vincent's, on the 6th of September 1802 effected in London the policy in question for
4001., lost or not lost at and from St. Vincent's to the vessel's last port of discharge
final sale, and delivery, in all or any of the West India and Bahama Islands, America,
and the Havannah, with liberty to load and unload goods without being deemed any
deviation. And the insurance was declared to be on profits valued at the sum
insured : and in case of loss no other proof of interest to be required than that policy.
The policy was underwritten by the defendant for 2001. On the 5th of July 1802,
the vessel, without having discharged any part of her cargo, sailed from St. Vincent's
for the Bahama Islands; and on the 13th, while proceeding on her voyage with her
cargo of slaves, was, by the perils of the seas, wrecked and lost at the Bahamas. The
(a) See all the cases collected in 6 Bac. Abr. 674, 5, edit. of 1798.
(b) Wilson v. Rastall, 4 Term Rep. 753, and Calcraft v. Gibbs, 5 Term Rep. 19; but
these were upon the misdireation of the Judge in penal actions. But in R. v. Francis,
2 Term Rep. 484, a new trial was granted in quo warranto after verdict for the
defendant against the weight of evidence.
1308
6 EAST, 316.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0038&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)