4th. Whether the life of Mr. B. was actually despaired of at the time of the execution of the deed.—Verdict. That it was.
[586]. In a work lately published in Paris, entitled “Rapports et Consultations de Medicine legale, recueilles et publiées par J. Ristelheuber, D. M. Médecin en chef à l’hospital Civil de Strasbourg”, 8 vo. p. p. 172, the subject of insurance on lives and annuities, is amply considered; and the following case is fully detailed, which excited so much interest, some years ago, at Strasburgh. M. Frierd sold, on the 11th of March, 1809, a large sum in the funds for the purchase of an annuity on his own life. He was at the time of the bargain, and had been for ten years, afflicted with Hemiplegia, in consequence of an apoplectic seizure; and he died on the second day after the signing of the document. The question therefore is, whether M. Frierd, on the day on which he signed the papers, was, or was not, already under the influence of the disease to which he fell a victim thirty hours afterwards. The question was debated with much talent and ingenuity on both sides; and the volume before us contains the various reports, opinions, and arguments, written on the occasion.
[587]. See Price on Annuities, and Bailey’s Doctrine of Life Annuities and Assurances.
[588]. Residence in great cities is almost universally believed to be prejudicial to the duration of human life: and that it may generally be so in some slight degree we are not disposed to deny. The Life Insurance Offices however, offer a practical proof that the difference between residence in London and the country, is not so great as is generally supposed; since these bodies, whose interest and experience constitute them the best judges of the subject, do not make any difference in the premiums required, from this change of circumstance.
[589]. See Park on Dower.
[590]. This was afterwards brought into B. R. by writ of error, as to the mode of returning the jury. Cro. Eliz.
[591]. This case is variously reported, in Cro. Eliz. 502 the son is stated to have survived; in Noy. 64, that the father moved his feet after the death of the son.
[592]. See Mason and Mason, 1 Meriv. 308, and articles of the Code Napoleon there cited. In this case it was referred to the master to enquire what children the testator (who with one of his sons had been lost at sea) had at the time of his death; the master reported that he was unable to state whether Francis, the son, survived his father or not. Sir W. Grant, M. R. directed an issue at the request of the plaintiff. See also Taylor v. Deplock, 2 Phill. 281.
[593]. Cum bello pater cum filio perisset, materque filii quasi postea mortui bona vindicaret, agnati vero patris, quasi filius ante perisset, Divus Hadrianus credidit patrem prius mortuum. Dig. Lib. 34, T. 5, 5, 9, S. 1, de rebus dubiis.
[594]. Cum pubere filio mater naufragio periit: cum explorari non possit, uter prior extinctus sit, humanius est credere filius diutius vixisse, l. c. lex 22.