FIRE TELEGRAPHS.-Under FIRE CALLS, and FIRE DETECTORS AND INDICATORS, we have given an account of all inventions of this class which we regard as applicable to Fire Extinguishment and Fire Protection generally. We consider the Automatic (Fire) Signal Telegraph to be beyond all question the most complete invention yet known.

FIRE TOWERS.-See FIRE OBSERVATORIES. [FIRE PROTECTION, 1677.] FIRE TRAPS. This term is usually applied to buildings so constructed, or adapted to certain occupations, as for instance having lifts, or shafts from the bottom to the top, so placed that, in the event of fire once occurring, any chance of saving the building or stock must be regarded as hopeless from the beginning. Happily, the surveyors to the different fire offices are becoming very vigilant in regard to these. [See FIRE INS., CLASSIFICATION OF RISKS.]

FIRE UNDERWRITERS; FIRE UNDERWRITING.-The officer of the fire ins. co. whose immediate bus. it is to accept or reject risks is in the U.S. designated the Fire Underwriter. In Europe this designation is little used. The chief officer is styled the man. or sec. The truth is, that the bus. of fire underwriting, in its ordinary practice, is hardly ever carried out as a mere matter of individual underwriting, that is to say, by a subscription of a certain amount, at the foot of a common form of pol., as is the case in marine ins. The custom alike in Europe and the U.S. is to issue a pol. or contract under seal, embodying the conditions of the particular asso. issuing the same. Every fire office, however, has one principal officer, who in effect performs the duty of fire underwriter. Here is an American outline of the requirements of a modern fire underwriter :

He should be a good judge of character; something of a physiognomist-though in these days, when brokers so much intervene, there is not much chance to use such knowledge. He should be a housekeeper in theory, and better if he be so in practice; he should be a cabinet-maker and upholsterer, so far as to judge between a good and a poor article; a builder, so far as to form estimates of value and damage; a merchant, in having a general knowledge of most kinds of merchandize and their market values; a book-keeper and accountant, to examine accounts and statements, and thus properly adjust losses; and a common-sense lawyer, to look into a variety of contracts and stipulations that may come up in the way of bus., and to understand the law governing the contract of ins. Last, but not least, he is supposed to be governed in part by past experience in making a proper charge of prem. for risks offered; to judge sometimes on prevailing winds as they might affect risks in certain focalities; to look understandingly upon the internal arrangements and the external surroundings, and to inquire generally into the ordinary means for arresting a fire should it break out.

It takes years of active training to acquire all this varied knowledge.

The Mutual Fire, founded in Manchester in 1870, presented in a modified degree a revival of the principle of individual fire underwriting. The manager signs under a power on behalf of a number of the leading members.

An art. in the Ins. Times of N.Y. Nov. 1872, contained the following:

If any position requires a clear head, quick perception, and firmness, it is the fire underwriter. He should not only know the nature of the risk and its surroundings, but he should know something of the character of the men who are to receive his pol. Have they made a reputation in bus., or are they mere adventurers? Are they to be found in their bus., exercising a watchful care over the detail, familiar with every plan to be carried out, or do they leave the chief operations and management to salaried agents? It has been said by some wise pol. maker that the rating of the party insured was more important in their judgment than the rating of the building in which he transacted his bus. There are, at this time, five dry goods' houses in this city, whose aggregate ins. cannot be less than 20,000,000 dol., of whom three have been in bus. more than 45 years, and the other two more than 30 years, yet but one of the number has ever made claim for loss occurring in their place of bus., and that loss did not exceed 1500 dols.! They are men who watch their bus. closely. These firms may be exceptions, but they are exceptions on a grand scale, and prove that thorough discipline and care in bus. ought to receive great consideration with the underwriter.

The Ins. Times, returning to the charge in July, 1874, says:

The underwriter's dangers are

Underwriting, like war, abounds in the element of danger. incessant and ubiquitous. They lurk in every risk offered for his acceptance. He is constantly at war with the most destructive elements in existence, which are ever awaiting an opportunity to escape control, and whelm his company in disaster. He assumes an aggregate number of risks, which the experience of the past and the nicest calculation show that he may, if they are wisely selected and duly distributed over a wide area, safely undertake to carry; but if this calculation is not borne out by the maintenance of the correct principles of underwriting, and the exercise of a thoroughlytrained skill and sound judgment in the business, the losses will in experience exceed the estimate at many points, and the safety and success of the co. be made dependent upon guess-work and chance. When the true principles and precepts of underwriting are thus violated, the bus. degenerates into mere gambling, and gambling of a kind in which the co. has so many chances against it, that they seldom fail in the end to effect its ruin.

The Spectator, N. Y., of the same year, said:-"The growing complexity of the bus. of F. Ins. is making it necessary that the highest order of talent shall be called to its assistance. Fire underwriting has an affinity with almost everything that goes to make up that entity called civilization. Being a perfect underwriter implies that one understands the principles underlying all kinds of bus. transactions with which ins. has dealings."

During this year it was announced that the City of Baltimore, alone in the U.S., possessed the novelty of an individual fire underwriter-Mr. James C. Wheeden: "Mr. Wheeden was for 25 years a member of the Board of Directors of the Associated Fireman's Ins. Co., and during that period was, with rare exceptions, in daily attendance at the office. He confines himself almost exclusively to dwelling-house risks, of which he makes careful surveys, and as he knows everybody in the eastern section of the city, where he has lived 69 years, he has little to fear from the elements of moral hazard. He has successfully conducted his bus. for more than a year with only one trifling loss.

Having ample means, he is fully prepared to furnish indemnity in case of loss.”—Baltimore Underwriter.

The Rep. of Mr. Thomas H. Montgomery, the Gen. Agent of the National Board of Fire Underwriters, U.S., presented at the 9th ann. meeting, April, 1875, contains the following important obs. addressed to the members of the local boards of that organization, but equally applicable to underwriters generally :

Earnest men of all professions look beyond their daily battle for existence, and with increased selfculture strive to make their fellow-citizens share the results of their knowledge. If the lawyer seeks to improve the code of his town or state; if the physician rises above the application of his healing art to individual cases, and strives to improve the hygiene of his locality; there is no cogent reason why the underwriter should not look beyond his tariff and his pol., and endeavour his utmost to make his townsmen measurably safe from sweeping fires. It is this professional character which the local underwriters should realize and believe in; and the more this idea can be extended, the more will he be sensible of its dignity and usefulness,-second indeed to none of the learned and leading professions of the land. As the lawyer or the physician have each his recognized code of charges for professional services, but looks beyond this for yearly advances in the knowledge of his profession, so the local underwriter should look upon his tariff only as his approved code of charges, and far beyond this, by reading and study, seek in his individual capacity to advance and enlarge his profession, and cause the community in which he makes his home to feel the advantage of his efforts in the improvement of all municipal regulations bearing on the question of fire hazard in his locality.

The brilliant address of Mr. Edgar A. Hewitt, of the Chronicle, N. Y., before the Convention of the Underwriters' Asso. of the South, held at New Orleans, in April, 1876, contained the following apt passages:

....

Fire underwriting is not, and under existing conditions cannot be, an exact science. It is a perpetual experiment, requiring for its successful conduct the utmost keenness of observation, quickness of apprehension, clearness of judgment and fertility of resource. The fire underwriter is like the sailor making his way in darkness through an untried sea. He has the principles of his bus. to guide him, as the sailor has his compass. His experience is to him like the sailor's observation of the changeful sky and wind and sea. But he has no chart, no map of the liquid desert he is exploring, and frequent soundings must be taken.

For success in fire underwriting theories and traditions will not avail without a close and constant observation of existing facts. The observation must be close, because the facts material to success are difficult of discovery; it must be constant, because those facts are continually changing. FIRE WALL.-A complete party-wall carried up from the foundation to beyond the roof, without openings, and designed to prevent the spread of fire to the adjoining risk. This is provided for by the Building Acts in force in Lond. and many large towns in the U.K. In the U.S. this wall, which is not yet so generally adopted, is designated a Standard wall. [FIRE FENCE.] [FIRE PROTECTION.]

FIRE WARDENS.-Persons appointed in those States of Germany and Switzerland in which the Gov. insures the buildings; and whose especial duty it is to make periodical visits of inspection, with a view to see that proper precautions against fire be preserved. We believe that many of the early towns in the U.S. appointed Fire Wardens. FIRE WARNINGS.-See FIRE ALARMS; FIRE CALLS; FIRE TELEGRAPHS. FIREWORKS.-These are believed to have been unknown to the ancient Greeks and Romans; although the Chinese are reputed to have manufactured them in very remote ages. They are stated to have been manufactured in Florence about 1360; and to have been employed as a spectacle in 1588. In more modern times they have contributed largely to the number of fires, and as such have been excluded from among the ordinary risks covered by pol. of fire ins.

1667.-The Fire Ordin. of Lond. passed this year contained the following:

XXVI. Item, That no person whatever be henceforth permitted at any time to make or cause to be made any sort of Firework; or to fire or cause to be fired any such fireworks within the City or Liberties thereof; except such persons only as shall be thereunto appointed by H. M. or any lawful authority under him.

Another Ordin. was issued on this subject in 1697. See FIRE PROTECTION.

1697.-The 9 & 10 Wm. III. c. 7-An Act to prevent the throwing or firing of Squibbs, Serpents, and other Fireworks-recites: “Whereas much mischief hath lately happened by throwing, casting, and firing of squibbs, serpents, rockets, and other fireworks, some persons having thereby lost their lives, others their eyes, others have had their lives in great danger, and several other damages have been sustained by many persons, and much more may thereby happen, if not speedily prevented.' For remedy whereof, persons were prohibited from making or selling such fireworks; and penalties imposed for throwing or firing the same. The provisions of this Act soon came to be disregarded, and practically remained so for nearly a century and a half.

1839. By sec. 54 of the Metropolitan Police Act, 2 & 3 Vict. c. 47, passed this year (sub-sect. 15), every person who should throw or set fire to any firework in any thoroughfare or public place was to be liable to a penalty of 40s.

1846.-By the 9 & io Vict. c. 25-An Act for preventing malicious injuries to persons and properties by fire, or by explosive or destructive substances—the improper use of fireworks can be made a punishable offence.

1858.-Explosion at Mr. Bennett's firework manufactory, Westminster Road, Lambeth, 5 persons killed, about 300 more or less seriously injured, and much property destroyed. 1860.-By the 23 & 24 Vict. c. 139-An Act to amend the Law concerning the making, keeping, and carriage of Gunpowder and compositions of an explosive nature, and concerning the manufacture, sale, and use of Fireworks-the penalty for throwing fire

works of any kind into any thoroughfare or public place was increased from 40s. to £5 (sec. 9). And no person may sell fireworks without a licence (sec. 8).

1872.-Mr. Griswold, in his Fire Underwriter's Text-book, lays it down, we presume upon the authority of some decided case, that, where the pol. provides that it "should be void if any articles subject to legal restrictions should be kept, unless specially consented to;" and a Municipal Ordin. forbids the keeping of certain kinds of fireworks; such pol. will not be held to cover such fireworks as may be forbidden by the Municipal Laws.

He also quotes another case (without date and reference), where the ins. was upon the plt.'s "stock of fancy goods and other articles in his bus. as a jobber and importer, with the privilege of keeping fire-crackers on sale." The pol. contained a clause providing that fireworks, among other things, should be specially written in the pol., otherwise they were not to be covered by the ins. The loss arose from a fire which originated in the fireworks for sale in the store. It was not pretended that fireworks were included under the name of "fire-crackers;" but the plt. contended they were included in the description "other articles in his line of bus." This evidence was rejected by the Court below, and judgment given for the deft. Upon appeal to the Circuit Court for Maryland, U.S., it was held by Chase, C.J.:

It

That the pol. itself requires that fireworks shall be specially written in it. They are among the goods described as specially hazardous, and add 50 cents. on the 100 dol. to the ordin. rate of ins. is impossible to think they are described by the general terms used in the pol. The ins. was at the ordin. rate. There can be no doubt that the evidence was properly rejected; the judgment of the Circuit Court must therefore be affirmed.

1873.-In Jones v. The Firemen's Fund Ins. Co., before the Commission of Appeals of N.Y., the facts were as follow: The pol. was issued upon a stock of fireworks, ordnance stores, and other merchandize, hazardous and extra-hazardous: provided that, if the premises should be used for the purposes of carrying on therein any trade or occupation, or for storing or keeping therein any article, goods, or merchandize, denominated hazardous, extra-hazardous, or specially hazardous, in the 2nd class of hazards annexed to the pol., the pol. should be void so long as the same should be so used. The pol. also provided that whenever gunpowder or any other art. subject to legal restrictions should be kept in quantities greater than allowed by law, or in a manner different from that prescribed by law, the pol. should be void.

In the 2nd class of hazards annexed to the pol., under the head of "hazardous" were "fire-crackers in packages ;" and under the head of extra-hazardous, "matches-stocks of on sale." No art. denominated specially hazardous were mentioned in the 2nd class; but in the 3rd class of hazards annexed to the pol. were art. denominated “ specially hazardous," amongst which were "fireworks."

An Ordin. of the Common Council of the City, in force at the time the pol. was issued, provided that no person should thereafter "store any fireworks of any kind or description, other than Chinese fire-crackers, within the limits of that City, except as in the Ordin. provided." The Ordin. further provided that "fireworks, excepting coloured pot and lance wheels, and other works of brilliant-coloured fires, not exceeding in value 1000 dol., might be kept for retailing within the fire limits, from the 10th day of June to the 10th day of July of each year, and no longer except by permission.

About a week before the fire occurred, the insured, in order to fill an order from a customer, purchased a quantity of signal lights, such as were in the Ordin. called "works of brilliant-coloured fires ;" and a few remained on hand and were among the insured goods when the fire occurred. The evidence tended to prove that such goods were constantly kept in the store, and that the risk of fire was not only greatly increased thereby, but that it orig. in these signal lights.

The fire occurred on 26th Aug., and the property insured was totally destroyed.

On the trial in the Court below, the judge refused to dismiss the plt.'s complaint; and refused to submit to the jury the question whether or not by keeping those goods the risk was increased, and directed a verdict for the plt. It was now held-1. That it was not intended that the ins. should cover an article so especially hazardous that the insured had no right to store it. 2. Fireworks, in the sense in which the term was used, had reference to such fireworks as were in the prohibition excepted, or might by permission be kept for retailing. 3. If upon the whole case the defendant was not entitled to a nonsuit, he was entitled to have the question whether the risk was not increased by keeping the prohibited article submitted to the jury.-Ins. Law Jour., ii. 186.

1875.-By sec. 48 of 38 & 39 Vict. c. 17-An Act to amend the Law with respect to manufacturing, keeping, selling, carrying, and importing Gunpowder, Nitro-Glycerine, and other explosive substances-regulations are contained in regard to firework manufactories; and under the powers of this Act the Sec. of State has issued a series of regulations as to small firework factories.

1876. The National Board of Fire Underwriters in the U.S. have taken timely precautions to prevent the mischief which might arise from over-zeal in celebrating the Centennial of American Independence.

The manufacture of fireworks, by reason of explosions and from other casualties, leads to an ann. loss of life more or less considerable. These are included in the Reg.-Gen. returns, either under burns, or violent deaths. [FIRE PROTECTION.] [GUNPOWDER.]

FIRES AT SEA.-These terrible calamities appear to be largely on the increase.

The loss

of life too often, and the destruction of property always, renders such fires very important from an ins. point of view. [FIRES ON BOARD SHIP.] [MARITIME CASUALTIES.] [SHIPS, INS. OF.] [SHIPWRECKS.]

FIRES AT THEATRES.-See THEATRES.

FIRES CAUSED BY ACCIDENT.-Fires caused by Accident are here distinguished from those caused either by Negligence or Design, which are spoken of under separate heads. A certain per-centage of fires will always result from accident, as defined under ACCIDENT in this work; what that per-centage may be we shall have occasion to consider under FIRES AND FIRE INS., STATISTICS OF. It is certain that, after deducting the fires caused wilfully, by far the larger proportion remaining are the result of negligence in some of its multitudinous forms; but still accidents are inevitable: and it may be considered that no amount of care will render ins. altogether unnecessary.

1708.-By the 6 Anne, c. 58, it is provided that no action, suit, or process whatever should be had, maintained, or prosecuted against any person, in whose house or chamber any fire should, after 1st May, 1708, accidentally begin; nor any recompense be made by such person for any damage suffered or occasioned thereby, any law, usage, or custom to the contrary notwithstanding. This provision was to remain in force 3 years. 1711. The preceding Act was made perpetual by 10 Anne, c. 24, s. I.

1772.-By the 12 Geo. III. c. 73, sec. 37, a similar exemption from consequences was enacted.

1774. By sec. 86 of the former Metropolitan Building Act-14 Geo. III. c. 78-the exemption of 1708 is again enacted, and the exemption extended to any "stable, barn, or other building, or on whose estate" any such accidental fire shall happen. This portion of the Act remains unrepealed, and has been held now to operate as a public Act, and not to be confined in its operations to the districts to which the Act orig. applied. The Act does not apply where the fire is lighted intentionally, and fire happens to result.-Filliter v. Phippard, 1847.

1804.-By the Code Napoléon (sec. 1733), tenants of houses are answerable in case of fire, unless they can prove that the fire happened by accident or superior force (force majeur), or by faulty construction, or that the fire was communicated from a neighbouring house.

1847.-The Towns Police Clauses Act of this year—10 & 11 Vict. c. 89—contains the following:

31. If any chimney accidentally catch or be on fire within the said limits, the person occupying or using the premises in which such chimney is situated shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding 10s. Provided always that such forfeiture shall not be incurred if such person prove to the satisfaction of the Justice before whom the case is heard that such fire was in no wise owing to omission, neglect, or carelessness of himself or servant.

1865. The Metropolitan Fire Brigade Act of this year-28 & 29 Vict. c. 90leaves the exemption of 1708, as amended in 1774, still in force.

FIRES CAUSED BY LIGHTNING.- These will be spoken of in detail under LIGHTNING. It is sufficient here to state that fire ins. pol. usually cover this risk. [EXPLOSIONS, subheading Gunpowder.]

FIRES CAUSED BY NEGLIGENCE -So far as can be gathered from the traditions of early nations, a principle has prevailed that whoever caused damage to life or property by fire should be punished in proportion to the degree of negligence exhibited; and further that he should be compelled to repair the damage to the extent of his means. Moses estab. a law of this kind, which is believed to have been but the counterpart of that in force among the early Egyptians.

We propose to review the authorities upon the subject, as forming part of our hist. of FIRE PROTECTION.

By the Common Law of England, every master of a house or chamber was bound so to keep his fire as to prevent it from occasioning injury to his neighbours and others. If a fire broke out in a house and burnt the adjacent dwelling, or did other damage, the master of the house in which the fire began was liable to make compensation for the injury, and it was not necessary to prove negligence, which the law presumed. Thus, "If my fire by misfortune burns the goods of another man, he shall have his action on the case against me. "If a fire breaks out suddenly in my house, I not knowing it, and it burns my goods, and also my neighbour's house, he shall have his action on the case against me.' "So, if the fire is caused by a servant or guest, or any person who enters the house with the consent of the paterfamilias; but not when kindled by a stranger who enters his house against his will." And the custom extended not only to fires commencing in dwelling-houses, but also to a fire lighted in an adjoining close.Comyn's Digest, quoted by Mr. Bunyon in Assu. Mag. (See 1851.) How far Common Law has been modified by the Statute and Case Law we have next to examine.

1707.—By the 6 Anne, c. 58, it was recited—“ And whereas fires often happen by the negligence and carelessness of servants," and further, that if any menial or other servant through negligence or carelessness should fire or cause to be fired any dwelling-house or out-house, such servant being thereof lawfully convicted by the oath of one or more credible witness, he should forfeit the sum of £100, to be paid to the churchwardens of the parish. In default, 18 months in the workhouse.

VOL. IV.

2

1708.-The Common Council of Lond. caused to be reprinted the clause of the preceding Act in extenso, and circulated in the City. Stow says, "These sad accidents in the City by fire, occasioned oftentimes by the negligence of servants taking tobacco, or not putting out their candles, or leaving live embers in dangerous places, or otherwise," moved the Parl. to the passing the said Act.

1754.-A case, apparently not hypothetical, is given by Sir James Balfour in his Practicks of the Law of Scotland, designated "A Merrie Questioun anent the Burning of a Miln"-which affords an excellent specimen of the old Lowland Scotch language, in add. to illustrating the law in regard to fires caused by negligence :

Gif it happin that ony man be passand in the King's gait or passage, drivand befoir him twa sheip festnit and knit togidder, be chance ane horse, havand ane sair bak, is lying in the said gait, and ane of the sheip passis be the ane side of the horse, and the uther sheip be the uther side, swa that the band quhairwith they are bund tuich or kittle his sair bak, and he thairby movit dois arise, and caryis the said sheip with him heir and thair, until at last he cumis and enteris in ane miln havand ane fire, without ane keipar, and skatteris the fire, quhairby the miln, horse, sheip, and all is brunt; Quæritur, Quha sall pay the skaith? Respondetur, The awner of the horse sall pay the sheip, because his horse sould not have been lying in the King's hie streit, or commoun passage; and the millar sall pay for the miln and the horse, and for all uther damnage and skaith, because he left ane fire in the miln without ony keipar."

1772.-By 12 Geo. III. c. 73, a fine of £100, or in default imprisonment with hard labour for 18 months, is imposed upon servants causing fires by negligence.

1774. By the Metropolitan Building Act-14 Geo. III. c. 78—the penalty last named was re-enacted in the following form:

And whereas fires often happen by the negligence and carelessness of servants, be it therefore enacted, by the authority aforesaid, that if any menial or other servant or servants, through negligence or carelessness, shall fire or cause to be fired any dwelling-house, or out-house, or houses, or other buildings, within the limits aforesaid or elsewhere in the Kingdom of Gt. Brit., such servant or servants being thereof lawfully convicted, by the oath of one or more creditable witness or witnesses, made before two or more of H. M. Justices of the Peace, shall forfeit and pay the sum of £100 unto the churchwardens or overseers of such parish where such fire shall happen; to be distributed amongst the sufferers by such fire in such proportions as to the said churchwardens shall seem just; and in case of default, or refusal to pay the same, immediately after such conviction, the same being lawfully demanded, that then, and in such case, such servant or servants shall, by warrant under the hands and seals of two or more of H. M.'s Justices of the Peace, be committed to the common gaol or house of correction, as the said Justices think fit, for the space of 18 months, there to be kept to hard labour.

1789. In the Reformed Criminal Code of Tuscany, promulgated this year, there is the following:

But when the fire shall be the consequence, not of fraud, but of negligence, the punishment shall not exceed that of banishment or confinement; and when the fault shall be found to be but trifling, or very trifling indeed, it shall no longer be treated as a criminal, but a civil matter.

1804.--By the Code Napoléon (art. 1383) it is declared: "Every one is responsible for the damage of which he is the cause, not only by his own act, but also by his negligence or by his imprudence." While further (art. 1284): "A person is responsible, not only for the injury which is caused by his own act, but also for that which is caused by the act of persons for whom he is bound to answer, or by things which he has under his care." As a result of this law, nearly everybody insures the property of his surrounding neighbours, as well as his own; hence some properties become insured many times over, to the advantage, in this case, of the ins. offices.

1837.-In Vaughan v. Manlove, before the English Courts this year, it was held, that an action for damages lies against a person for so negligently constructing and keeping a hayrick on the extremity of his land, that, in consequence of its spontaneous ignition, his neighbour's house is burnt down. (3 Bing. N.C. 478.)

1847.-Under the Towns Police Clauses Act-10 & 11 Vict. c. 89, sec. 31-a penalty of 10s. is imposed for carelessness, whereby any chimney shall accidentally catch fire. [CHIMNEYS.]

This year there arose the case of Filliter v. Phippard, wherein the facts were as follow: The plaintiff and defendant were owners of adjoining lands. The defendant lighted a fire in one of his closes at a time when, by reason of the state of the wind and weather, it was dangerous to do so. The fire extended to the plaintiff's close, and destroyed the hedges, gates, etc.:-Held, that the defendant was not relieved from liability by the stat. 6 Anne, c. 13, and 14 Geo. III. c. 78, which must be taken to apply to fires which are the result of chance, or are incapable of being traced to any cause; but not to fires which, although they may be accidental as contradistinguished from wilful, are occasioned by negligence or want of reasonable care. (17 L.J. Q.B. 89.)

1851.-In vol. i. of Assu. Mag. is a paper contributed by Mr. C. J. Bunyon, M.A., On the Liability of the Occupier of a Tenement for Damage done to that of a Neighbour, by Fire kindled through his own or his servant's negligence, wherein the legal authorities are critically examined, and the law upon the subject stated. This learned writer, towards the conclusion of his paper, says: "Hence it appears that although a man may have insured his own property to its full value, he may yet become a loser to a considerable extent, in the event of a fire occurring, by being compelled to indemnify his neighbour. Whether the ins. offices may ever choose to enforce this equity in their own favour will be a question for their own decision, and one which will probably be viewed in a mercantile rather than a legal right; but as there is nothing to prevent a private individual