APPENDIX TO CHRONICLE. 



305 



Dt. Johnston stated, that when 

 Mr. Dunne desired his signature 

 to the certificate, he objected to 

 the part which related to " habits 

 act tending to shorten life ;" but 

 that Mr. Dunne overcame his scru- 

 ples, by assuring him that the com- 

 pany knew of Medlicott's bad ha- 

 bits, and did not regard them. 



Mr. James, the company's agent, 

 stated, that when Mr. Dunne pro- 

 posed the insurance to him in M arch, 

 1811, he hesitated to receive the 

 proposition, from the impression 

 left on his mind by the doubt be- 

 fore started : that Mr. Dunne pre- 

 vailed upon him to entertain the 

 proposition, by assuring him that 

 Medlicott's habits had become re- 

 formed : that it was this assurance, 

 joined to the reliance placed by 

 him on the certificates signed by 

 Dr. Johnston and Mr. Fitzgerald, 

 and on the seemingly good appear- 

 ance of Mr. Medlicott, and joined 

 also to the altered statement made 

 by iNIr. Rawson, that induced him 

 to transmit the new proposition for 

 the directors* decision. 



Mr. Rawson, on the part of the 

 plaintiff, stated that the hint he had 

 given to Mr. James, in November, 

 1810, was, that Medlicott was ac 

 customed to drink a pint of wine 

 before dinner, and a bottle of wine 

 after dinner. Mr. Rawson admit- 

 ted, however, that when Mr. James 

 applied to him for information, on 

 the renewal of Mr. Dunne's pro- 

 position in March, 1811, he stated 

 Mr. Medlicott's habits to have be- 

 come regular ; and that he de- 

 scribed his health to be good. Mr. 

 Rawson stated that he was enabled 

 to declare this, from the observa- 

 tions he had made on Medlicott's 

 health and habits, during some 



Vol. LV. 



time he had passed with him in the 

 interval between the two propo- 

 sitions. 



Lord Norbury, in his address to 

 the jury, declared that the direc- 

 tors of the company were fully 

 justified in having brought the 

 circumstances of this case before a 

 jury. His lordship was of opinion, 

 however, that the intimation given 

 to Mr. James, in November, 1810, 

 was sufficient to have guarded the 

 company against the danger of the 

 insurance ; and thought that, on 

 that account, the plaintiff's decla- 

 ration and guarantee, in Aprils 

 1811, should have been of no 

 avail. 



The jury retired ; and, after an 

 absence of more than an hour and 

 an half, returned, and stated that 

 they could not agree, — that seven 

 were of one opinion, and five of 

 another. 



Lord Norbury desired that th* 

 jury would again retire, andendeft- 

 \ our to concur. 



It was then suggested, by the 

 plaintiff's counsel, that some com- 

 promise might be offtred on the 

 part of the company, by which the 

 difficulty of the jury might be re- 

 lieved. All compromise, however, 

 on the part of the company, was 

 refused. 



At the end, nearly, of another 

 hour, the jury again came into 

 court ; and the foreman, alderman 

 M'Kenny, declared it to be imp<»- 

 sible that they should be of one 

 mind. 



It was then agreed that a juror 

 should be withdrawn ; the effect 

 of which, of course, is, that the 

 action falls to the ground; but 

 that the plaintiff may renew it, if 

 he think fit. 



X 



