Globe & Rutgers Fire Ins. Co. v. Winter Garden Co.

(after stating the facts as above). Insurance Company’s position at this bar is, virtually, that it was a violation of the above-quoted policy clauses for Garden Company to transport the insured property without obtaining from the acting carrier an assumption of liability siich as is imposed on common carriers by tradition or statute, or at least what remains thereof over the lawful exceptions in such carriers’ “ordinary” bill of lading. We cannot agree to this, and notwithstanding able argument for plaintiff in error, believe that Garden Company’s right of recovery rests on simple…