Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 2.djvu/314

existed a fire in this mill, and the fire produced an explosion, the fire would be the proximate cause. Although the explosion thus produced may have contributed in a large degree to the destruction of the property, it would nevertheless be a loss by fire, within the meaning of the policy, and the defendant will be liable to the plaintiff for such loss. But if there was no fire, and an explosion from some other cause than fire occurred, by which the property was damaged, it would not be a loss by fire, within the terms of the policy, and the defendant would not be liable for such loss.

The plaintiff must satisfy your minds, by a preponderance, that a fire existed which produced the explosion. If he has done so he is entitled to your verdict. If he has failed to do so your verdict will be in favor of the defendant.

Verdict for the plaintiff.

---

In the Matter of Corse, Jr., Bankrupt.

(District Court, S. D. New York. May 3, 1880.)

Husband and Wife—Wife’s Separate Property—Gift.—Facts in this case considered, and held that certain property conveyed to the wife under the will of her father, and held in trust for her by his executors, which by arrangement was by them transferred to the husband, was not intended as a gift to him.

Same—Same—Sale of Real Estate to Husband.—The transfer to the husband of certain real estate as part of such property, held, to have been a sale, and not held by him as trustee for the wife.

Same—Claim of Wife Against Husband’s Bankrupt Estate.—Wife held entitled to prove her claim for such property against the husband’s estate in bankruptcy, and also entitled to interest thereon.

P. Cantine, for creditors.

C. Whitaker, for claimant.

Choate, D. J.⁠This is a proceeding for the re-examination of a proof of debt filed by the wife of the bankrupt for the sum of $38,672.10. In the proof of the claim it is described as “a balance due deponent for real estate, bonds, mortgages, notes and drafts conveyed, consigned, transferred and set