BLAAUWPOT v dam costa June see white v dobinson sim Burnand v Rodocanachi App  Cas satisfaction have be make under a royal commission for distribution of  prize to the insure such of the insurer as have pay hold entitle to  restitution though foreigner but not those who have compound and renounce  savage SC jewel ms the plaintiff as underwriter by a policy of insurance make  at Amsterdam saint February to Elias and Solomon de paz have insure the ship  friendship for guelder or pound S d the ship be soon after seize by the  Spaniard before the declaration of war and carry into havannah and condemned  in the course of the follow year the plaintiff pay the sum of guelder to Elias  and Solomon de paz the ship have also be insure with the royal exchange  assurance company for the sum of pound but the company have afterward compound  and renounce savage his majesty by a proclamation issue that June be please to  order a distribution of all prize take before the declaration of war in equal  moieties between the sufferer and the captor accord under a commission for the  distribution of such prize the sum of pound S d be on the that of November pay  to the executor of Elias de paz as a compensation for the loss of the ship  friendship the bill be bring to recover the sum of pound S d the  solicitorgeneral Mr Wilbraham and Mr Pechell for the plaintiff the plaintiff  ought to be repay from the defendant in proportion to what they Eden er p  receive from the crown the defendant have have a double satisfaction it be  Eden like the case of a suppose loss of a ship money pay and the ship  afterward discover to be in safety the attorneygeneral for the royal exchange  assurance office contend that though the office compound and renounce savage  yet that such composition be only mean to extend to any part of the ship or  good that may be recover or to any satisfaction or restitution that may be  make by the Spanish captor to the sufferer jewel and Perrot for the executor  of the de pazes if this be in the nature of savage the underwriter must  undoubted have the benefit of it but it be not so it be a grant of the king a  royal bounty to British sufferer and not a act of justice the commissioner for  the distribution be only allow to pay the difference to the sufferer the  plaintiff as foreigner can not have claim under the commission the Lord keeper  I be of opinion that upon the policy and the peril happen and the payment of  the money by the underwriter the whole right of the assure vest in they the  assure have this right of restitution vest in they against the Spanish captor  which be afterward prosecute by the crown by reprisal satisfaction have be  make in consequence of that capture I think the plaintiff be entitle to that  benefit and that it be receive by the executor of Elias de paz in trust for  they the defence of the plaintiff be foreigner and as such not entitle to any  benefit be a fallacy they stand in the place of British subject and have  therefore in this court the same right as British subject the capture be the  origin of that right which belong to the plaintiff by relation as claim under  one of the sufferer Eden as to the nature of the savage it be so much save out  of the hand of the Spaniard by mean of the interposition of the crown it be so  understand by the crown it be to be consider as a retribution to the  underwriter as lessen the loss incur by the capture as to the royal exchange  assurance they have no foundation whatever for their claim they have settle  their loss with the assure and renounce all benefit of savage decree the sum  of pound S d with interest at per cent from the time of the payment of the  pound S d and cost Reg lib a fol note the case of Randall v Cochran Ves arise  in consequence of the same proclamation and be precise in point it do not  appear to have be cite vide park on insurance