De Peyster v. Gardner

The affured in this policy has, certainly, made out a cafe of more favor, than the one we have juft difpofed of. For he was not owner, but only matter of the Polly, and, therefore, could not refufe to take the goods of Stanibury ; nor had his intereft, or agency, any influence on the confifcation. The judgment of the court below mutt, therefore, be affirmed with double cotts.