hold interest or equity of redemption, or if the interest of the insured to the property be any other than the entire, unconditional and sole ownership of the property, for the use and benefit of the insured, it must be so represented to the company and so expressed in the written part of this policy, otherwise the policy shall be void." Held that the insured had not, at the date of the insurance, the entire, unconditional and sole ownership of the property; that "the purchaser at the sheriff's sale, although he had not acquired a complete title, either legal or equitable, as held in Philips vs. Demoss, 14 Ill., 412, had certainly an interest in the land to the extent of his bid, which in a few months would ripen into a title unless redeemed," and that the non-disclosure of this sale avoided the policy.

Reaper City Ins. Co. vs. Brennan. *

ILL. S. C.

PLEADING.

26. LIFE. "The form of allegation was that the company, 'by its drafts in writing signed by its secretary,' made the obligation sued on. The answer seeks to put in issue the facts here alleged by denying that the company, 'by its draft in writing signed by its secretary, executed the obligation as alleged.' The denial is inartistic, but sufficient under our system of pleading."

Westlake vs. Moore, 19 Mo., 556; Joy vs. Cooley, ib., 645; Wynn vs. Corey, 43 Mo., 306.

The First National Bank of Kansas City vs. Hogan.

16.

The

27. FIRE-Citizenship of a Corporation. averment in the declaration that the defendant is a corporation created by an act of the legislature of the State of New York, located in Aberdeen, Mississippi, and doing business there under the laws of the State, "is, in legal effect, an averment time the defendant was a citizen

* Decision Rendered May To appear in 52 III.

of New York, because a corporation can have no legal existence outside of the sovereignty by which it was created.

The Germania Fire Ins. Co. vs. Francis. *

UNITED STATES S. C.

POLICY.

§ 28. FIRE-Clause in.-A policy was issued to the plaintiff in which reference was made to a survey-No. 280, on file in the office of the Park Insurance Companyas the survey and description of the property insured, and the conditions attached to the policy made this a part thereof and a warranty of the truth of the statements therein made.-Held that the survey referred to cannot be rejected, and the residue of the policy upheld, "upon the ground that the plaintiff, when he received the policy, supposed that it was another and different paper, which had been filed in the Park office, to which reference was made in the contract."

LeRoy, et al., vs. The Market Fire Ins. Co. †

N. Y. C. A.

PRACTICE.

§ 29. FIRE-Jurisdiction.-Where it appears on the face of a declaration in a case, on a writ of error from the district court for the northern district of Mississippi, that the plaintiff is a citizen of Illinois, but it does not appear that the defendant is a citizen of Mississippi, it is not necessary for this court to notice the subsequent pleadings, but it will declare that the district court acquired no jurisdiction over the case, and will reverse the judgment and direct the district court to remand the case to the State in which it was instituted.

The Germania Fire Ins. Co. vs. Francis.

* Decision Rendered March 6th.

Decision Rendered February 17th. To appear in 45 N. Y.

27.

$30. FIRE-Jurisdiction.-The State law required the county treasurer to issue county certificates of indebtedness to incorporate companies for the amount of taxes assessed on their investments in the public indebtedness of the United States, with interest thereon, "and which taxes have been judicially decided to have been illegally imposed and collected," and the United States Supreme Court had adjudged such tax illegal, so far as the government "bonds and stocks" were concerned, but had not, till after refusal of the county treasurer to issue such county certificates, decided the tax illegal in its application to "certificates of indebtedness,"—Held, on writ of error to the State Court for refusing mandamus, that the writ be dismissed and that it ought to appear from the record that a federal question was raised, in order to give this court jurisdiction of the case, and that, from all that appears, the decision of the court of appeals may have been passed simply on its construction of the State statutes, and that they only decided that the plaintiff had no remedy under that statute.

The Phonix Ins. Co. vs. Gardiner, Treas.

UNITED STATES, S. C. *

31. LIFE-Misrepresentation - Materiality of Jury. It was alleged that the answers of the party insured to the questions in the application, "Is the party sober and temperate?" and "Has he always been so?" were false. The court gave this instruction to the jury: "It is for you to determine the materiality of the alleged misstatements, if any have been proven.”—Held that "a misrepresentation by one party of a fact specifically inquired about by the other, though not material, will have the same effect in exonerating the latter from the contract as if the fact had been material, since by making such inquiry he implies that he considers it so, and that the instruction was erroneous.

1 Phillips, on Insurance, 542, and cases cited; Campbell vs.

*Decision Rendered March 27.

The New England Mutual Life Ins. Co., 98 Mass., 401; Davenport vs. New England Ins. Co., 6 Cush., 341. Miller vs. The Mutual Benefit Life Ins. Co.

- 2.

$32. LIFE-Evidence- Weight of Jury.-There was some testimony tending to impeach a witness.--Held that "However slight the effect of this testimony, and however little the consideration to which it was entitled from the jury, still its weight is to be determined by them. It is not the province of the court, by an instruction, to withdraw any proper testimony from the jury." Miller vs. The Mutual Benefit Life Ins. Co.

- 2.

$33. LIFE-Pleading.-The judge in the court below gave as a reason for overruling a motion for a new trial, that he believed the recital in the policy that the first year's premium was paid, was conclusive upon the company and could not be contradicted, the policy not being in the record and the pleadings having failed to set out any receipt in full of the first year's premium,Held that "the court had no right to go out of the record to inspect the policy to see whether it did not contain some other provision upon which a recovery might have been had, without reference to the condition (stated in the pleadings). That matter was coram non judice, and the same reason that made it improper for the circuit court to consider the question should prevent us from doing so."

Froelich vs. The Atlas Mut. Life Ins. Co.

Mo. S. C.*

PREMIUM.

34. LIFE-Acknowledgment of Receipt.-"As between the immediate parties to the contract the acknowledgment of the receipt of the first annual premium, embodied in and indorsed on the policy, is but an ad

*Decision Rendered February 3d. To appear in 47 Mo.

mission, and liable to be contradicted. It is simply evidence of the fact of payment, but not conclusive."

Sheldon vs. Atlantic Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 26 N. Y., 460; Insurance Co. of Pennsylvania vs. Smith, 3 Wharton, 520.

"There is nothing in principle to take contracts of insurance out of the rule, which governs and controls all other contracts, even the most solemn."

Baker vs. The Union Mutual Life Ins. Co.

1.

SUBROGATION.

$35. FIRE-Avoidance of Policy.-The policies contained a provision that in case of any change or transfer of title in the property insured, the policy should be void and cease, and also that "whenever the insurers shall pay to the mortgagee any sum for loss, for which loss the company would not have been liable to the mortgagor, or owner, the insurers shall be subrogated to the rights of the mortgagee, and entitled to an assignment of the mortgage." The mortgagor, before the loss, sold the mortgaged premises.-Held that "The mortgagor could not have recovered upon the policies, and it follows that he is not entitled to have the moneys paid under the policies to the mortgagee applied to the satisfaction of the mortgage," and that "the insurers are entitled to be subrogated to the rights of the mortgagee."

Springfield Fire and Marine Ins. Co. vs. Allen, et al.

4.

WARRANTY.

§ 36. LIFE-Representation.-The application by the assured for a policy on the life of her husband, Miller, comprised five papers, headed respectively: "Particulars required from the persons proposing to affect assurance on lives in this company;" "Questions to be answered by the physician of the party applying for insurance;" "Questions to be answered by the friend of the party applying for assurance;" "Questions to be answered by the agent, if the applicant is not personally known to him;" "De