...immediately from a third building, which was itself fired by the explosion. In this case it was held that the explosion undoubtedly produced or set in operation...was carried to the cotton by first burning another building supplies no new force or power which caused the burning. Nor can the accidental circumstance...

...explosion. In this case It was held that the explosion undoubtedly produced or set in operation the lire which burned the plaintiff's cotton. The fact that...was carried to the cotton by first burning another building supplies no new force or power which caused the burning. Nor can the accidental circumstance...

...immediately from a third building, which was itself fired by the explosion. In this case it was held that the explosion undoubtedly produced or set in operation...was carried to the cotton by first burning another building supplies no new force or power which caused the burning. Nor can the accidental circumstance...

...intervened of itself sufficient to stand as the cause of the misfortune, the other must be considered as too remote. In the present case we think there is...produced or set in operation the fire which burned the plaintiffs cotton. The fact that it was carried to the cotton by first burning another building supplies...

...intervened, of itself sufficient to stand as the cause of the misfortune, the other must be considered as too remote. In the present case, we think there is...was carried to the cotton by first burning another building supplies no new force or power which caused the burning. Nor can the accidental circumstances...

...intervened, of itself sufficient to stand as the cause of the misfortune, the other must be considered as too remote. In the present case, we think there is...was carried to the cotton by first burning another building supplies no new force or power which caused the burning. Nor can the accidental circumstances...

...excepted, and the court held that the insurers were not liable. In the opinion Mr. Justice Miller said: "The explosion undoubtedly produced or set in operation...was carried to the cotton by first burning another building supplies no new force or power which caused the burning." Though these principles are announced...

...Ed. 65. Here the court said: "The explosion undoubtedly produced or set in •pcration the fire that burned the plaintiff's cotton. The fact that it was carried to the cotton by first burning another building supplies no new force or power which caused the burning." S3 Heffron v. Insurance Co., 132...

...the opinion Mr. Justice Miller said: "The explosion undoubtedly produced or set in operation the flre which burned the plaintiff's cotton. The fact that it was carried to the cotton by flrst burning another building supplies no new force or power which caused the burning." Though these...

...intervened, of itself sufficient to stand as the cause of the misfortune, the other must be considered as too remote. "In the present case we think there is...was carried to the cotton by first burning another building, supplies no new force or power which caused the burning. Nor can the accidental circumstance...