The defendants also plead that there was another condition of the policy which renders them not liable to pay under the policy, viz., "It the claim be in any respect fraudulent, or if any false declaration be made or used in support thereof, or if any fraudulent means or devices are used by the insured or anyone acting on his behalf to claim any benefit wider the policy.... All benefit under this policy shall be forfeited,"
On this charge of fraud the defendants alleged that when before the arbitrators the plaintiffs put in a document, that is a small book entitled "List of goods in the godowns and Factory of A, N. Nastasheffsky on April 25, 1991? which contained a list of goods on the premises with prices attached, And the defendants allege that the plaintiff and his son when before the the arbitrator stated in their evidence that these prices or values of goods there set down were the cost of the productions of the goods; which was a false and fraudulent statement to their own knowledge, as those prices were in reality the sale prices and not the cost of the production of the goods. In reply to the statement of defence, the plaintiffs state that the stipulations as regards keeping the books away from the insured premises contains no province that upon breach. of such stipulation the plaintiffs' rights under the policy shall be forfeited, and that a breach of this stipulation or condition does not in fact cause a forfeiture of the insurance money due, although it, may, perhaps, entitle the defendants to damages, The plaintiffs further plead that they were unable to read or speak English, and that they inquired of the defendants' agent in Harbin, named Tetzner, the meaning of the clause, and were told that if the books were not kept in the same building as the goods insured, but in the plaintiffs' office (which was a separate building), the conditions of the said clause would be complied with. This is what is pleaded in the reply, which is a more or less fair interpretation of the clause, subject to Tetzner the agent being unaware that insured goods were kept in the same building as that in which the office was situated. The elder Nastasheffsky in his evidence carries it slightly further by saying: "He said that the.books should not be kept in the same place as' the goods insured. I said they were kept in the office; ko said that would do. Tetzer was their agent; and he said "I
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.