Injury by collision has given rise to a peculiar question in the law of insurance. We have seen in the chapter on the Law of Shipping, that if a vessel colliding with another is in fault, she is obliged to pay for the damage done to the other vessel; and that where the two colliding are equally and wholly without fault, the loss rests where it falls. But that exceptional laws in some ports divide the loss between the vessels. If a vessel thus innocent is but slightly injured, but is obliged to pay a heavy sum by reason of this rule of division, are the insurers liable for the amount thus paid, as for a loss by a peril of the sea? It has been held in this country, that they were so liable; (t) but English adjudication, (u) and recent decisions in this country, would lead to the conclusion that the insurers are only liable for the damage done to the vessel insured. (v)

(pp) Ionides v. Universal, etc. Ins. Co. 14 C. B. (n. s.) 259.

(q) Gordon v. Bowne, 2 Johns. 160; Brown v. Neilson, 1 Caines, 525; Patterson v. Black, 2 Marsh. Ins. 781; Koster v. Reed, 6 B. & C. 19; Green v. Brown, 2 Stra. 1199.

(r) See ante, p.* 307.

(s) Gordon v. Rimmington, 1 Camp. 123; Emerigon, Ins. Meredith ed. 850.

1 In Dudgeon v. Pembroke, 2 App. Cas. 284, it was held, that if a vessel is lost by reason of unseaworthiness during a storm, the proximate cause of the loss was the perils of the sea. But in Inman Steamship Co. v. Bischoff, 7 App. Cas. 670, where an ordinary marine policy of insurance was effected by a shipowner "on freight outstanding," and, the ship becoming inefficient through perils of the sea, the charterers refused to pay freight thereafter, under a provision allowing them so to act in such case, it was held, that the underwriters were not liable for the pecuniary loss, as the perils of the sea were not the proximate cause of such loss.

D. - Of Theft or Robbery

By the usual phraseology of our policies, insurers are liable for losses arising from all acts which amount to piracy or robbery, (w) * whether insurance against theft would make the insurers liable for a loss by larceny may not be certain; but by the weight of American authority they would be liable. (x) But they would not be liable for loss by theft or robbery without violence from others than the crew, if the phrase "assailing thieves" is used, and that is now not uncommon. (y)