¶1We are of opinion the reprefentation of failing in ballaft, was merely Hating the veffel would not be ex-pofed to the fea perils attending a loaded ihip. It was made in a time of profound peace, and in the prefent inftance, was fubftantially performed. We have no doubt on the condufl of the mailer. It was certainly barratry, and the plaintiff muft have judgment.
2 Cai. Cas. 222
Suckley v. Delafield
Decided November 15, 1804
New York Supreme Court · decided 1804-11-15
ON a policy of infurance, upon the body of the ihip Ann, effected on the following reprefentation. “ The Ann will fail “ from hence in a few days, for the Weft Indies, in ballaft/* The claufe, relating to contraband, was ftricken out, but that concerning illicit trade, was retained. In the firft count of the declaration, the lofs was alleged to have taken place by feizure, by the French government, in St. Domingo.
Decided 1804-11-15