case city versus Selwyn and martin all the second seal after Trin term July a  commission pray for examine witness in the west Indies as the fact arise there  and to stay the defendant proceed at law on a policy Lord Hardwicke grant the  commission and the injunction as the voyage be at and from Carthagena to porto  Bello and the fact must necessary arise in the west Indies atkins er p while a  ship be prepare for a voyage upon which it be insure the insurer be liable but  if the voyage be lie aside and the ship lie by for or year with the owner  privity the insurer be not liable the plaintiff move to stay the defendant  from proceed to trial at law upon a policy of insurance and that a commission  may issue for the examination of witness in the west Indies on a suggestion  that the material fact for the plaintiff arise there Lord chancellor where a  ship be insure at and from a place and it arrive at that place as long as the  ship be prepare for the voyage upon which it be insure the insurer be liable  vide ante vol but if all think of the voyage be lie aside and the ship lie  there five six or seven year with the owner privity it shall never be say that  the insurer be liable for it will be very absurd to make he suffer for the  whim or caprice of the owner who choose to let the ship lie and rot there as  this be a voyage at and from Carthagena to porto Bello the fact which be in  controversy in this cause must necessary arise in the west Indies and  therefore the injunction must be grant to stay the defendant the insure from  proceed at law till further order that the plaintiff may have a opportunity by  a commission to ascertain the fact which he insist on to be very material that  the ship lie above four year at Carthagena before it be sink there by do Blass  and that all think of proceed on its voyage to porto Bello be lie aside there  be no fair hold on account of the English fleet be in those sea under the  command of admiral Vernon and likewise the success he meet with afterward in  his attack of that port I see no difference at all between this case and that  of green versus suasso December ante SC S p and therefore will make the same  order here as in that cause a injunction be grant accord