case the saddler company versus Badcock and other may it be necessary the  party injure shall have a interest or property in the house insure at the time  the policy be make out and at the time the fire happen and therefore after the  lease of the house expire the insureds assign the policy do not oblige the  insurer to make good the loss to the assignee Ann stride have six year and a  half to come in the lease of a house from the plaintiff on the that of April  become a proprietor of the handinhand office by insure the sum of pound on the  house for seven year and on pay twelve shilling down and three pound some time  after the company agree to raise and pay out of the effect of the contribution  stock the say sum of pound to her and her executor administrator and assign so  often as the house shall be burn down within the say term unless the director  shall build the say house and put it in as good plight as before the fire and  on the back of the policy it be endorse that if this policy shall be assign  the assignment must be enter within twentyone day after the make thereof mrs  stride lease expire at midsummer the house be not burn down till the January  after and she make a assignment of the policy to the plaintiff the d of  February after the question be whether the plaintiff the assignee of mrs  stride be entitle to the pound insurance money or to have the house build  again or whether the house be burn down after mrs stride property cease in it  the company be oblige to make good the loss to her assignee of the policy the  company make a order subsequent in time to mrs stride policy in that whereas  policy expire upon the property of the insureds cease if there be no  application of the insure to assign or to have the loss make up then the  person have the property may insure the say house in the say office  notwithstanding the term for which the house be original insure be expire  there be evidence read for the plaintiff to show that they tender the  assignment to the defendant to enter in their book but they refuse to accept  of it atkins Lord chancellor during the progress of this cause while the  defendant seem to depend chief upon the subsequent order I be of opinion  against they but upon hear what be further offer I think the plaintiff be not  entitle to be relieve there may be three question make in this cause first  whether this accident which have happen be such a loss as oblige the defendant  to make satisfaction to the plaintiff second whether upon the term of the  original policy the office be oblige to do it three which be rather  consequential of the former whether the plaintiff be proper assignee of mrs  stride under this policy if this matter rest single upon the policy itself I  shall not think it such a loss as will oblige the defendant to make  satisfaction under this policy the state of the case be mrs stride be only a  lessee her time expire at midsummer the house be burn down the January after  within the seven year the plaintiff the saddler company be ground landlord and  entitle to the reversion of the term upon the d of February seven month after  the expiration of the term and one month after the fire the assignment be make  and in consideration of five shilling only so that it must be take as a  voluntary assignment as it stand before I it have be insist on the part of the  defendant that the plaintiff be not entitle to recover as stand in the place  of mrs stride because she have no loss or damage her interest cease before the  fire happen and this introduce the second and three question I be of opinion  it be necessary the party insure shall have a interest or property at the time  of the insure and at the time the fire happen atkins er p atkins it have be  say for the plaintiff that it be in nature of a wager lie by the insurance  company and that it do not signify to who they pay if lose now these insurance  from fire have be introduce in late time and therefore differ from insurance  of ship because there interest or no interest be almost constant insert and if  not insert you can recover unless you prove a property the insure of ship be  as old as the law of oleron and Rhodes who inhabitant be the great trader of  the world look into the book that treat of insure and you will find the term  be loathing danger the intention of all insurance be to avert any damage or  loss the insure may sustain upon this principle in all modern insurance of  ship interest or no interest be introduce and between the subject of different  nation for this reason because a great deal of contraband trade be carry on  and I believe begin in the Spanish trade first but such insurance be render  void by stat Geo c the commonlaw lean strong against those policy for some  time but be find beneficial to merchant they wink at it new law have be enact  which make it felony to destroy ship and the temptation to it hang arise from  interest and no interest insert in policy No long ago than when I first sit in  the court of king bench I have hear these insurance call fraudulent but though  inconvenience may have arise from these word to the insurance company yet some  inconvenience too may arise on the other side because if any person may insure  whether he have property or not it may be a temptation to burn house to  receive the benefit of the policy by the first clause in the deed of  contribution in the year this society call the Handin hand office incorporate  themselves the society be to make satisfaction in case of any loss by fire to  who or for what loss be they to make satisfaction why to the person insure and  for the loss he may have sustain for it can property be call insure the thing  for there be no possibility of do it and therefore must mean insure the person  from damage by the term of the policy the defendant may begin to build and  repair within six day after the fire happen atkins it have be true say this  give the society a option to pay or rebuild and show most manifest they mean  to insure upon the property of the insure because nobody else can give they  leave to lie even a brick for another person may fancy a house of a different  kind thus it stand upon the original agreement the next question will be  whether the subsequent order make by the defendant in have make any alteration  I be of opinion it have not for it be make only to explain a particular case  in the policy for it may have be a question whether mrs stride can have come  before the expiration of the term to have examine the book of the office and  therefore this order be make to give her such a power it have be strong object  that the society can not make such a order I be very tender of say whether  they can or not because on one hand it may be hard to say that as a society  they can make any by order for the good of the society and on the other hand  it will be a dangerous thing to give they a power to make a alteration that  may material vary the interest of the insure the assignment be not at all  within the term of this order because it be plain it mean a assignment before  the loss happen now with regard to the loss happen before the assignment make  mrs stride be entitle to nothing but what be to be pay back upon the deposit  it be plain she think so for if she have imagine she have be entitle to pound  will any friend have advice her to make a present of it to the plaintiff the  case of Lynch versus dayrell in the house of lord the that of march bro par  can bro p c and Edward S c show how strict this court and the house of lord be  in the construction of policy to avoid fraud Lord chancellor king be of  opinion there the plaintiff have no right to the money under the policy  because no loss have happen to he he have no interest in the thing insure at  the time of the fire and that policy be not in the nature of they assignable  nor intend to be assign from one person to another without the consent of the  office the bill here must be dismiss atkins er p