LUNT V. BOSTON MABINB INS. 00. 665 �the owners of the vessel, and could not be expected to have any voice in repairing ber beyond the immediate necessities of the situation. Under these circumstances the inferenee seems almost irresistible that such repairs were contemplated as would render her seaworthy for the voyage, and when the insurance should take effect, arid that any other repairs were a matter of indifference to the parties. �I do not understand it to be contested that if the repre- sentation was properly construed it was error to mie that there ■was not a breach of the representation; but if this is con- tended, I think the defendant cannot maintain its contention. It is not necessary to refer to the strict rules which re^nire a warranty to be fulfiUed. As to representations, niOre lib- eral rules obtain. �In De Hakn v. Hastley, 1 T. E. 3e3, Lord Mansfield said : "A representation may be equitably and substantially an- swered, but a -warranty must be strictly complied with." The two cases most frequently referred toi in illustration df'lihe rule are Suekleyr. DgZa^oM, 2 Caiue's Bep. 222, aud P<&vsun V. IFateoM, 1 Oowp. 785. ■ ' ' . ■ i : �In Suckley v. Delafield, where the representation wfts that' the ship would sail "in a few days for the West Indiesj^in ballasti," it was held to mean the vessel would not be exposed to the sea perils attendinga loaded ship, and was oubstan-' tially performed, although the master secretly donieyeS into the ship and transported a'small quantity of merchandise. ' �In Pawson v, Watson, aupra, the representation 'vi'as tha,t the ship was ta sail with 12 guns and 20 men; She sailed with 10 guns and 6 swivels, and with 16 men and 7 boys. It was held that as the representation had not been departed from f raudulently, nor in a mannor detrimental to the under- writer, the policy was in force. �The elementary writers are unanimous to the effect that it is suffioient if promissory representations are substantially complied with. Mr. Arnonld states the doctrine thus: "When it appears reasonable to conclude, from the whole cir- cumstances of the case, that the failure to comply with the strict terms of the representation bas not substantially altered ��� �
