Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 3.djvu/567

 well on said premises, in the sinking of which a vein of gas was struck, which, coming in contact with a gas jet near by, caused an explosion, and set fire to the building; that in the sinking of said well plaintiffs were engaged in an unusual and extraordinary undertaking, not customary or necessary to the business they were carrying on, and materially increased the risk and hazard of fire, in violation of the policy, and by which the policy became void. By reason whereof they deny liability upon said policy.

The plaintiffs, by reply, deny generally the allegations of the answer, and allege that by the terms of the policy they had a right to make alterations and repairs incident to their business, which was that of manufacturers of undertakers’ goods, heating apparatus, etc., and that the sinking of said artesian well was an alteration incident to said business, within the meaning of said policy. And, further, that the agent of the insurance company had full knowledge that the plaintiffs were boring said well, and made no objections thereto; and that the statement in the proof of loss that the well had reached 267 feet is not correct, but it should be 230.

Three issues are presented by these pleadings. The first is raised by the answer of the defendant, and is substantially that the plaintiffs, without the consent of the defendant indorsed upon the policy, increased the risk by sinking an artesian well upon the premises insured, and that by the sinking of the well gas was struck, which, coming in contact with a gas jet, caused the burning of the building insured.

The second is that the sinking of the well was embraced in the clause of the policy permitting alterations incident to the business; and the third is that the agent of the defendant had notice of the sinking of the well while the work was progressing, and made no objection thereto.

It may be said generally that contracts of insurance are to be construed as other contracts. And among the most important rules for their construction is, that all parts of the contract are to be taken together; and they shall be liberally construed; and that such meaning shall be given to them