both marine and _war_ risk--the policy made payable
to him (Davidson) in case of loss. Two questions arise upon that policy:
1st--why, if the property were _bona fide_ neutral (the cargo itself was
also insured in London) the war clause should be inserted? and, 2nd--why
Davidson should make the policy payable to himself? If he advanced this
freight money on the credit of the London house, he had no insurable
interest in it; and if the lumber really belonged to the London house,
and was going to their partners or agents at the port of delivery, why
should Davidson pay the freight in advance at all? And if Snyder
purchased the lumber of Davidson, why should Snyder not have made the
advance for his principal instead of Davidson? The conclusion would seem
to be, that Davidson was shipping this lumber on his own account to
agents, in whose hands he had no funds or credit, and as the lumber
might not be sold readily, the ship could not be paid her freight unless
it were paid in advance? Further: the ship had a contingent destination.
She was either to go to Monte Video or Buenos Ayres, as the consignees
might find most advantageous. This looks very much like hunting for a
market. But further still. Although Davidson prepared a formal letter of
consignment to Zimmerman, Faris, and Co., to accompany the consular
certificate, he at the same time writes another letter, in which he
says, "The cargo of John S. Parks I shall have certified to by the
British Consul as the property of British subjects. You will find it a
very good cargo, and should command the highest prices." How is Davidson
interested in the price which this cargo will bring, if it belongs, as
pretended, to the house in London? And if Davidson sold to Snyder, and
Snyder was the agent of the house in London, Davidson should have still
less concern with it. In that same letter in which a general account of
recent lumber shipments is given, the following remarks occur:--"Messrs.
Harbeck and Co. have a new barque, Anne Sherwood, in Portland, for
which they have picked up in small lots a cargo of lumber costing 20,000
dollars. I have tried to make an arrangement for it to go to you (on
account of John Fair and Co., of London?); but they as yet only propose
to do so, you taking half-interest at twenty-five dollars, and freight
at eighteen dollars, payable at yours (port?), which is too much. If I
can arrange it on any fair terms, I will do so for the sake of keeping
up your