Charge for Marine Insurance: Before Mr. P. D. Shaw, Presidency Magistrate: K. C. P. M Moideen Abdul Mercoir v. Charles Pinsent: The case was called on for the first time on Friday 9th June. Mr. Normandy, instructed by Mr. Robert Grant appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Eardley Norton instructed by Mr. Short of Mr. Champion’s office for the defense. Mr. Normandy, in his opening, said that the prosecutor charged Mr. Charles Pinsent of the firm of Messrs. Shaw and Winch, with cheating under the following circumstances. Up to June 1881, the prosecutor, who was a skin and hide merchant, had affected his insurance on all shipments in England, through Messrs. Willis and Rodwell in London. Subsequently to that date, owing to the inducements and representations of the defendant, that he could affect the insurances more advantageously to the prosecutor in Madras, the prosecutor has been induced to insure through Messrs. Shaw, and Winch in Madras. About March 1882, the prosecutor came for the first time to learn that Messrs. Shaw and Winch had not, as a matter of fact, paid to the Insurance Company in Madras the various amounts which, in their accounts rendered to the prosecutor, they had represented they had so paid. Therein lay the charge. … (continues) … (numerous references to Pinsent in examination and cross examination of witnesses over two pages and near end includes) …
[Here the Magistrate took down verbatim the following questions from Mr. Norton] – Did you not in the present of Mr. Francis Cripps, Coshan and Charles Pinsent, about the end of June 1881, make an arrangement that the defendant was to charge you an extra percentage of which the amount was not then fixed, for insurances effected by the defendant on goods shipped by you in Madras through Shaw and Winch?
No, I did not. I thoroughly understand the question, and I will swear I did not make that arrangement. … (later) …
Mr. Norton addressing the Magistrate said Mr. Pinsent was, as yet, beyond his cross-examination of the complainant, but had no opportunity of disclosing the real motives of the prosecution. Those motives are based upon a feeling of retaliation; they have been supported by the most reckless swearing; and the have culminated in gross perjury; I am prepared with the most completed and overwhelming evidence to establish the fact that the complainant was only one of very large number of skin merchants with whose free consent and knowledge Mr. Pinsent was entitled by specific arrangement to charge a half per cent. Upon insurance effected by him upon all shipments. I was prepared so conclusively to establish my case, and to refute the statements of the complainant that would have asked your Worship for sanction to prosecute the latter for perjury. The credit and good name of a merchant are of so inestimable value to him that I ask your Worship, in dismissing the complaint, to add such an expression of opinion with regard to the conduct of the complaint as may in some measure mitigate the scandal and the disgrace which the more ventilation of such a charge must necessarily inflict upon Mr. Pinsent.
His Worship repeated his opinion that Mr. Pinsent had been guilty of no deception, and the accused was discharged.
Transcribed in whole or part from scanned originals: Presented with or without modified text and punctuation. For absolute accuracy refer to the original newspapers. Source: The British Newspaper Archive.
Referenced
GRO0133 India: Charles Powell Tronson Pinsent: 1849 – 1904