ing has been larger; they have had no disastrous storm; and the October frost did not everywhere stop the growth of the plant. The estimate for 1854 may be put at 160,000 bales. From Alabama the reports are various and contradictory. Up to July the promise was never better. The wet weather brought the boll-worm on many plantations, and its ravages at some places were very great. The forms fell off very rapidly: many blossoms were killed. The fine prospects of the summer were by this time injured. The frost then came and destroyed all hope of the late crop of bolls; but in many districts the growth of the cotton was not interrupted by this frost, and during the whole month of November the fine weather for opening and gathering the late crop favored the planters very much.

For Mobile the receipts may be anticipated to be about the same as for the last two years. Similar remarks apply for the most part to New Orleans. The worm was more disastrous in Mississippi and Louisiana, than it was in Alabama; and the malignancy of the yellow fever interrupted at many places proper attention to the crop. A slight decliue may be anticipated, therefore. for New Orleans. From Texas, on account of the increased number of planters and the favorable seasons, a small increase over last year may be looked for. From the whole country the receipts may be put at 3,000,000 bales, as in the table below. The great falling off in the receipts for the first part of the season, would appear at first sight to warrant the prediction that the whole crop would be very small. But last year the rivers were very favorable to early shipments from the plantations to the seaboard; and the extraordinary continuance of the yellow fever at the Gulf ports, and its unusual malignity, have, for the present season, discouraged the planters and steamboat owners from forwarding to an early market, the cotton that was otherwise ready for shipment.

Total......

2,355,000 3,015,000 3,263,000 3,000,000

The supply from the East Indies will be large. The troubles in China, whither a large portion of their exports is directed, have diverted an unusual amount of cotton from Canton, to Liverpool and London. The imports into Liverpool alone from Surat, Madras, and Bengal, were, on the 18th of November, 277,544 bales, against 124,306 for the year 1852. The whole English receipts were 221,500 bales for 1852, and 328,800 for 1851. Of these amounts the Liverpool receipts were 156,673 and 232,100. If the same proportion yet prevails between the Liverpool and the London imports, the receipts for Great Britain of East India cotton for 1853, will exceed 400,000 bales. For the year 1854, the revolution in China will produce a more decided effect on this diversion of the trade, than it has hitherto done. The English prices which always influence very largely the amount of Indian imports, do not promise so favorably as last year. Balancing these two causes, the estimate for 1854 may be put at 400,000 bales.

From Egypt, Brazil, and the West Indies, the supply has been on the in

crease for the last four or five years. For the two years, 1847 and 1848, it averaged 136,450 bales. For 1849 and 1850 it was 251,350. For 1851 and 1852 it was 263,850. For 1853 the receipts at Liverpool up to the 18th of November were 219,451 bales against 244,939 for the preceding year. As the whole English receipts for 1852 were 346,700 bales, the smallness of the decline at Liverpool authorizes the expectation that at the end of 1853 they will reach 300,000 bales.

Will this be lessened for the incoming year? No serious falling off can be expected in the South American and West India exports. These constituted for 1851 and 1852 more than half of the receipts, and for 1853 they were two-thirds. In the Egyptian, a decline may be expected on account of the Turkish troubles. But as the planting of the crop took place before these difficulties became serious, the deficiency of the present year will be but slight. Not less than 250,000 bales may confidently be anticipated for 1854.

The supply then from all these sources will probably reach 3,650,000 bales, against nearly four millions for 1853, as appears from the following table :

As this estimate is 400,000 bales above the probable demand at present prices, according to the estimate given above, it would seem impossible to sustain the rates at which cotton is now selling. The stocks are already large, on account of the immense production of last year. On the first of September the amount of old cotton in our ports was 135,648 bales against 91,176 for the year 1852. On the first Friday of October it was in Liverpool, 770,770 bales against 506,670 in 1852. At Havre it had increased by October 14th, to 53,586 bales over the preceding year. The accumulation at these places having advanced more than 350,000 bales during 1853, furnishes a proof that the large crop of the past year has not been consumed. The great deficiency in our receipts at the seaboard, for the early part of the present season, and of our exports to foreign countries, does not permit the enhanced amount of stocks to be now so apparent as it otherwise would be. Since then the stocks increased largely in 1853, and promise to continue to advance still more for the present year, it would seem impossible that the market price for cotton should continue above the average rates. For the last fourteen years, from 1840 to 1853, the average price has been 8 cents and 7 mills. The exports to foreign ports for the first ten of these years, amounted in all to 7,128 millions of pounds; for the last four they have been 3,570 millions. The value of the first ten was 552 millions of dollars; of the last four, 381 millions. For the whole period, 10,698 millions of pounds were exported for 933 millions of dollars, giving the average price just mentioned. The present price at Charleston, (December 9th, 1853,) for middling is 91, and for good middling 10 cents. These rates being decidedly above the average, cannot well be maintained, in the face of the

large supply and the diminished demand, while food remains dear and money scarce, while actual war is raging between Russia and Turkey, and imminent danger of general hostilities impends over the principal states of Europe. The large demand in the United States, both for the raw material and for English cotton goods, the immense trade opened in Australia, and the general prosperity in the English colonies and in Mexico and South America, will prevent a serious decline. But that prices must fall below the average of past years appears to be plainly foreshadowed by the history of the past and the circumstances under which the new year opens.

JOURNAL OF MERCANTILE LAW.

INSURANCE-TIME POLICIES.

In the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, November Term, 1853, F. W. Capen vs. Washington Insurance Company.

This case came before the Supreme Court on an agreed statement of facts in March, 1851, and upon the opinion as delivered by the Chief Justice, the statement was discharged, and the case sent down for trial, for reasons stated in that opinion, a note of which we republish. The case came up again last term on the report of the Chief Justice, and upon that report the opinion of the Court was stated by him at the present term. The Chief Justice said, that although the Court gave no opinion upon the main question when the case was first before them, yet the law as to implied warranty in time policies was then somewhat fully considered, and with the advantage of that discussion, he had drawn up with much care his proposed instructions to the jury. Those instructions had been considered by the Court, and received their assent, and as he had prepared no written opinion, he would read those instructions, (with some general remarks and illustrations,) as presenting the principles on which this case would be determined by the Court.

The opinion in March, 1851, upon which the case was sent to the jury, was as follows:-

The

This was an action upon a policy on the ship Riga for one year, and came before the Court upon an agreed statement of facts, in substance as follows: At the time the policy was subscribed, the Riga was at sea. She returned to Boston, and was again sent out with an assorted cargo to Norfolk, where she was surveyed and pronounced unfit to resume her voyage without essential and costly repairs. The surveyors thought, however, that she might take in a light cargo and go in ballast to some Northern port, where she could be repaired at less expense. She took in such a cargo, sailed, and was burned at sea. plaintiff admitted, that although seaworthy for the voyage upon which she was engaged at the inception of the policy, yet such was the condition of her timbers at that time, that it was certain she would require repairs before the expiration of the year in some essential parts of her frame work, to fit her for the cargoes usually carried by such vessels, but reserved the right to go to the jury upon these facts, if the judgment should be that their effect was to vitiate the insurance. The defendants also admitted for the purposes of the hearing, that she was seaworthy for the voyage in which she was first engaged, but likewise reserved the right to go to the jury if the judgment of the Court should be against them.

Chief Justice Shaw delivered the opinion of the Court. The question here presented is purely speculative. The great business of the courts is to render judgment, not to give opinions, although the performance of that duty often requires the expression of opinions on various points, directly or incidentally involved. That judgment must be rendered upon facts obtained in some way or other-by the verdict of a jury or the agreement of parties, as the case may be; but there must be a sufficient number of facts undisputed or proved. Sometimes a case is so complicated that it is exceedingly difficult to do more than pass judgment upon the special circumstances given-than simply to put it on one side or the other of some general rule, without affording an occasion or opportunity for abstract opinions upon points of law generally applicable.

The question apparently intended to be presented in this case is, whether, if a vessel is seaworthy at the date of a policy, but requires essential repairs before the expiration of the time for which she is insured, and is subsequently lost from another cause, independent of such defects, the insured can recover on his policy? This is a purely abstract question, and there are not facts enough to enable the Court to form an opinion even upon that. Was the condition requiring repairs one of natural decay? Did it arise or not from the very perils insured against? And when and where? If from such perils, was she at home or abroad? Was she within reach of repairs, or so far distant from a port where they could be obtained as to render it hazardous to seek them? Such are some of the questions which it may become necessary to answer before the point presented can be properly passed upon. Nor is the language used sufficiently precise to enable the Court to come to a determination. The word seaworthy is commonly applied to the condition in which the vessel is when the policy attaches, and is used to express her capacity for navigating the sea. If she has no capacity for navigation, there is nothing for the policy to attach to, and the contract is void, simply because its subject does not exist. But the word may be used to express the condition of a vessel adapted to the particular purpose for which she is to be used, and then a question arises as to the duty of the insured in such a case, and its performance. Must he make her seaworthy for each new adventure? And was she fit for the voyage upon which she was sent? The possibility of such a variety of circumstances capable of being embraced within the limits of this statement, renders an abstract opinion useless and improper. The Court have said that when a single question of law upon a state of facts is presented, they will hear it; but as this case stands, it presents a question too purely abstract. The opinion, if given, would be upon a partial or limited view, and might hereafter embarrass the Court. The statement of facts must be discharged, and the case sent down for trial.

The following is the material portion of the Chief Justice's report of the case, with his proposed instructions to the jury, November Term, 1851:-

This is an action upon a policy of insurance underwritten by the defendants, April 10, 1848, whereby they cause the plaintiff to be insured to whom it might concern, payable to him in case of loss, $6,240, on ship Riga, at and from the port or place where she was on March 30, 1848, at noon, to and at all ports and places to which she might proceed for one year from that time; and with a provision that if she should be at sea at the end of the year, the risk should continueat pro rata premium, until she arrived at her port of discharge.

There was evidence tending to show that at the time of subscribing of the policy the ship was at sea, that she afterwards arrived at Boston in the month of September with an assorted cargo, which she delivered in good order; and there was no evidence, that at the beginning of the year for which she was insured, March 30, 1848, she was not either safe in port, or in the prosecution of a voyage, on which she had sailed in a seaworthy condition, except that which might have resulted from the surveys subsequently mentioned, or that she was not a vessel capable of being made useful and fit for navigation, with suitable repairs at suitable times during the time insured.

There was also evidence that after undergoing some repairs at Boston, she sailed from thence to Norfolk in October, that she there took in a cargo of staves, which is a heavy one tending to strain a vessel, that she sailed thence for Sicily, and after being a short time at sea sprung a leak in heavy weather, as the plaintiff maintained, but which was denied by the defendants, who attributed the same to decay and weakness, in consequence of which, and at the solicitation of the crew, the master put back, and went into the port of Savannah, Georgia. That two surveys were then had, the result of which was a report of the surveyors that, in their opinion, owing to the weak state of the vessel and the decayed condition of her timbers, it was necessary that she should undergo extensive and costly repairs, in the removal of defective timbers among other things, and the substitution of new ones, though she might be in a fit condition with some calking and slight repairs to proceed to a northern port in ballast, or with a light cargo of cotton, for permanent reparation, the cost of such repairs at Savannah being estimated at $10,000, but much less at New York or Boston.

There was evidence that she was calked and slightly repaired at Savannah, and sailed with a light cargo for New York, and on her passage, about March 3d or 4th, was burnt at sea and totally lost.

The ground of defence was that at the commencement of this risk, March 30, 1848, regarding decay only, this vessel was so much weakened and impaired in strength as not to be able to bear the ordinary perils of navigation without essential repairs, and re-placing with new the timbers thus decayed or beginning to decay, for and during the time of one year, for which she was insured, and if so that she was not seaworthy, within the implied warranty which the assured were bound by, and so the policy never attached.

2. If the policy did attach, the assured were under a like implied warranty or obligation to have the vessel sound, in good repair, and seaworthy at the commencement of each voyage or passage during the time, and that if they failed to perform this duty or comply with the condition, the insurers were thenceforth discharged from their contract of insurance, that it became void, so that if a loss afterward happened, though by a peril insured against, and not caused in whole or in part by such unseaworthiness arising from weakness or decay. That said vessel did sail from Norfolk on a voyage toward Sicily in an unseaworthy condition, and that from that time the underwriters were discharged from further liability on the contract.

3. That the vessel sailed from Savannah towards New York in a like unseaworthy condition, by means of which the policy became void and the defendants discharged before the loss by fire which occurred during that voyage.

But the court ruled that on a policy on time for a certain term, at all times and places, there is no implied warranty on the part of the assured that the vessel is seaworthy, in the ordinary sense of that term, either at the time of the policy underwritten, or at the day on which the policy by its terms commences the risk; but that the only implied warranty in this respect is, that the vessel is in existence as a vessel, not lost at the time fixed for the commencement of the risk, capable, if then in port, of being made useful, with proper repairs and fittings, for navigation, and is in a safe or suitable condition for such a vessel to be in, whether at sea, in port, stripped and under repairs on a suitable railway for that purpose or otherwise, and is seaworthy when she first sails from port, or if she is at sea, that she has sailed in a seaworthy condition, and is safe (salvus-not lost) so as to be a proper subject for a contract of insurance at the time the risk attaches; and if the vessel is in such condition and the implied warranty to this extent is not broken, the policy attaches and is not void, and the premium cannot be recovered back; but if the vessel was then lost, became a wreck, or ceased to exist as a vessel, or was, if at sea, in a condition or under circumstances in which she could not on her arrival in port be made available by reasonable or suitable repairs and fitting for navigation, then there was no subject for the policy to take effect upon, the contract would fail and be void, and the premium liable to be recovered back.