Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 9.djvu/269

 254 FEDERAL REPORTER. �procure valid insurance upon a life unless he has an interest in that life. I may insure my own life, for I have an interest in' it. But an entire etranger to me, one who bas no interest in my life as a cred- itor or otherwise, cannot take out a valid polioy on it. Should he procure such policy the law •would condemn it as a mere wager, a bet on my life, a gambling contract, and there could be no recovery thereon. This rule prevails, not in the interest of insurance compa- nies, not out of regard to them. The rule has its foundation in good morals and sound public policy. It has been well said of such wager polieies that, "if valid, they would not only afford facilities for a demoralizing System of gaming, but furnish strong temptation to the party interested to bring about,. if possible, the event insured against. " The annals of crime furnish more than one instance where murder has been perpetrated by the holders of such polieies that they might reap the fruits of speculative insurance upon the life of their victim. If an entire stranger to me were permitted to take out insurance on my life, bis sole interest, you must perceive, would be in my speedy death. The law, therefore, wisely takes from him the temptation to bring about the event by forbidding such contract. The evils of gambling in such polieies are also apparent and great, and therefore the law will not sanction insurance obtained for the purpose of speo- ulating upon the hazard of a life in which the assured has no interest. �In the present case, as I have heretofore said, the policy on its face appears to be taken out by Beckwith S. Brockway on hisown account. But it is claimed it was not intended to be what it purports, but that form was adopted as a mere cover for a wager policy in favor of Dan- iel F. Seybert, the use plaintiff in this case. �It appears that Beckwith S. Brockway was a shoemaker, and there is evidence tending to show that he was without pecuniary means. When he died, on December 4, 1869, there was insurance on his life to the amount of 140,000, which, it is claimed, was out of all propor- tion to his station in life. There is evidence tending to show that all this insurance was taken by the procurement of Daniel F. Seybert, and for his benefit; that he (Seybert) paid all the premiums that were paid; that Seybert solicited Brockway to take out the policy in suit, and agreed to pay him $300 for so doing; that he did pay him $30 in cash, and gave him his two notes for $100 each. �The defendant claims that the evidence shows that the policy in Buit was taken out nominally for Brockway, but actually for Seybert, as a mere matter of speculation upon the hazard of Brockway's life ; ��� �