
    Goix against Knox.
    Where a policy of insurance contains the written clause, “ against all risks," it protects the insured against every loss happening during the voyage, except such as may arise from his fraudulent acts.
    This was an action on a policy of insurance, dated the 2lst of February, 1798, upon all kinds of lawful goods in the ship Minerva, on a voyage from New York to Guadaloupe, valued at 5500 dollars.
    The premium was ten per cent, and besides the usual risks enumerated in printed policies, it was declared, by a clause in writing, that the insurance was to be “ against all risks" The policy contained no warranty.
    The cause was tried at the last circuit held for the city and county of New York, before Mr. Justice Benson, and a verdict was found for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of the court on the following case, with liberty to either party to turn the case into a special verdict.
    The policy was admitted. It was also admitted or proved, that the Minerva, in the prosecution of the voyage insured, was captured on the 2d of April, 1798, by a British ship of war, and carried into the island of Antigua, where she and her cargo were both libelled in a court of vice-admiralty, and condemned as lawful prize to the captors, no reason' for the condemnation being assigned in the sentence.
    
      The plaintiff had property on hoard to the amount of 14,639 dollars 55 cents, for which the captain had signed a bill of lading in his favor.
    [•*338] *The plaintiff was1'"naturalized'as a citizen of the ' United States, on the , 2d of August, 1796; and before he was so naturalized, he was- a subject of the Swiss Cantons, of which he is a native. The plantiff abandoned to the underwriters on the 10th of June, 1798,, and at the same time exhibited the usual proof of Jos.s and interest.
    By the proceedings in the court of vice-admiralty of Antigua, which were- produced on the trial, it appeared that the Minerva had on board, when, captured, the following, papers, to wit: . , _ -
    1. An American register, in the name’of the plaintiff only
    2. An affidavit of the plaintiff, taken before a notary public in New York, dated the 1st of March, 1798, that he was the true and lawful proprietor of all and singular the goods, wares and merchandizes shipped by him on board the Minerva, as' specified in the two bills of lading and invoice thereto annexed, amounting to the sum of 14,639 dollars 55 cents, and that no subject of any of the present belligerent powers, or any other person or persons,, was or were, directly or indirectly interested or concerned with him in the said goods, or any part thereof,-the same being shipped solely for his account and benefit, and at his risk. To this affidavit were annexed two bills of lading, both filled up in favor of the plaintiff, and one invoice. The goods in one of the bills of lading, corresponded with the invoice, and amounted to the value insured. There was no invoice in the name of the plaintiff accompanying the other bill of lading, but among the admiralty papers there appeared, besides the bills of lading and invoice already mentioned, another bill of lading, and an invoice corresponding with it, in the name of Benjamin F. Haskin. This bill of lading in. favor of Haskin agreed, in all respects, with the one in favor of the plaintiff, which was not accompanied with an invoice ;
    3. An affidavit made by Haskin, on the 1st of March, 1798, before a notary public, that he was the-sole Owner of the goods contained in the last mentioned invoice, and in *the bill of lading in his favor, and that.no [*339] citizen or subject of the present belligerent powers had any part or portion'therein, directly or indirectly ;
    4. A manifest of the cargo signed by the captain, which corresponded with the goods specified in the two invoices above mentioned, and was sworn to before a notary public in New York:
    5. A sea-letter, granted .by the president of the United States to the master of the Minerva, in the English, French, Spanish and Dutch languages, specifying the voyage, and the articles- on board, with" the usual certificates of the "consuls, of those nations;
    6. Another bill of lading and invoice of• goods, in. favor of Jacob Fiiitado, a naturalized citizen of the United States;
    7. A clearance from the custom-house: at New York, dated the 28th of February, 1798;
    8. A passport for the Minerva as an American ship, signed by the president, and countersigned by the secretary of state, and the collector of customs of New York ;
    9. A roll of the crew, by which it appeared, that alt the crew, consisting of thirteen, were native Americans, excepting three; one of whom was a Prussian, another aFrenchman, and a third a Chinese. This roll was sworn to by the master, before a notary public, stating that all the crew were native or naturalized citizens of the United States; but in the roll it was also stated, that one of the crew was a subject of the king of Prussia ; that another was'a subject of the republic of France, and a third a subject of the emperor of China. This roll was duly attested by the collector of New York, and certified by the French and Spanish consuls ;
    10. The depositions of the master, and the first and second mates; by which it appeared, that the Minerva, when taken, had no colors but American, and that she made no resistance.
    By-the master’s deposition, it appeared, that he signed hills of lading for the cargo of the ship, as the property *of Haskin and the plaintiff. That all the bills of [*340] lading were presented to him by the plaintiff, which he: signed and delivered to him again.
    
      B. Livingston arid Burr, for the plaintiff. -
    
      Troup and' Harison, for the defendant.
   Per Curiam.

In the present case there is no warranty, either express or implied, nor any representation that the ship- or goods were neutral property ; and besides the usual risks, inserted in printed policies, this .policy declares that the insurance is to be “ against all risks.” .This expression is vague and indefinite, but if we allow it any force, it must be considered as creating a special insurance, and extending to-other risks than are usually contemplated. "We are inclined to give it a liberal construction, and apply it to,all losses, except such as arise'from the fraud of the‘insured. This-limitation is necessary and proper, for it cannot be supposed that the plaintiff was to be insured against his own fraudulent,acts.' The terms used are sufficiently broad to comprehend every other loss. With this construction, whatever may be the effect of the sentence of a foreign court of admiralty in ordinary cases, it .will not interfere-with the plaintiff’s\ight 6^ recovery in'this.

-Much reiiahce was placed by the defendant’s counsel on the-extra‘bill offfiading, annexed to the plaintiff’s affidavit,, and found among the ship’s papers which, it was contended,, was false and colorable, and tended to enhance the risk. • We think'it could not have that effect. On the face of the papers, it was plainly a mistake, and the other documents accompanying the property were calculated to lessen the risk, and preclude every idea of intentional fraud.

We are, therefore, of opinion, that the plaintiff is entitled to recover.

■ Judgment for the plaintiff. 
      
       By the statement'pf facts in this ease it appears that these wprds were written. Upon the construction of policies of insurance, Lord Ellenborough, remarks, in the case of Robertson v. French, 4 East, 135, ‘‘ that the greater part of the printed language of them,being invariable and uniform has acquired from-Use and practice a known and. definite meaning, and that the words superadded in writing (subject, indeed always to be governed in point of construction by the language and terms'with which they are accompanied), are entitled nevertheless, if there should.be any reasonable doubt Upon the sense ánd meaning of the-whole, to have a greater effect, attributed to them than to the .printed words, inasmuch as the written words are the immediate language and terms-selected by. the. parties themselves for the expression of their meaning, and the printed words are a general formula adapted equally to-their case, and that of all other contracting parties upon similar occasions and subjects.”
     