In  1873,  while  the  case  was  still  pending,  the  record  was  destroyed  by  the
burning  of  the  Quebec  court  house.   More  than  two  years  after,  the  appellant


10

Agreement  -Continued.
petitioned  under  the  Quebec  Statute  37  Vict.  ch.  15,  for  leave  to  recommence
the  proceedings,  which  was  granted  to  him,  and  he  instituted  the  present
action  against  the  respondent  as  representing  George  Burns  Symes  and
David  Douglas  Young,  who  had  composed  the  late  iirm  of  Symes  &  Co.,
and  were  then  deceased.
The  majority  of  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench  fop  Lower  Canada  were  of
opinion  that  the  demand  of  the  appellant,  not  having  been  made  in  the  first
case,  could  not  be  deemed  to  be  a  recommencing  of  the  cause  or  proceed-
ing of  which  the  record  was  burned  within  the  meaning  of  37  Vie.  ch.  15
Q.,  and  was  not  a  continuance  of  said  cause  or  proceeding  so  as  to  suspend
prescription  within  the  meaning  of  sections  7  and  21  of  that  Act.  But  the
court  did  not  consider  it  necessary  to  enter  into  the  consideration  of  the
question  of  prescription,  preferring  to  rest  their  judgment  on  the  broader
ground  that  the  respondents  were  only  bound  to  insure  for  the  amount  of
their  claim.
On  appeal  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  Canada,  Held,  Per  Bitchie  C.J.
