Louisiana. Germier v. Ins. Co., 109 La. 341, 33 So. 361.

Maine. Maine Beneficial Association v. Parks, 81 Me. 79, 10 Am. St. Rep. 240, 16 Atl. 339.

Massachusetts. Cobb v. Benefit Association, 153 Mass. 176, 25 Am. St. Rep. 619, 10 L. R. A. 666, 26 N. E. 230.

Michigan. American Ins. Co. v. Gilbert, 27 Mich: 429.

Minnesota. Cerys v. Ins. Co., 71 Minn. 338, 73 N. W. 849.

New York. Graham v. Ins. Co., 87 N. Y. 69, 41 Am. Rep, 349.

Rhode Island. Sweeney v. Ins. Co., 19 R. I. 171, 61 Am. St. Rep. 751, 36 Atl. 9.

Texas. Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Simpson, 88 Tex. 333, 53 Am. St. Rep. 757, 28 L. R. A. 765, 31 S. W. 501.

Virginia. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Rutherford, 98 Va. 195, 35 S. E. 719 [affirming 35 S. E. 361].

22 0rdway v. Chace, 57 N. J. Eq. 478, 42 Atl. 149.

23 Seal v. Ins. Co., 59 Neb. 253, 80 N. W. 807.

24 Niles v. Ins. Co., 119 Mich. 252, 77 N. W. 933; Stevens v. Ins. Co., 8! Wis. 335, 29 Am. St. Rep. 905, 51 N. W. 555; Johnston v. Ins. Co., 107 Wis. 337, 83 N. W. 641.

incumbrances upon the property insured;25 in life insurance the falsity of a warranted statement as to when insured consulted a physician,26 or that insured was in sound health,27 or was not pregnant,28 or the occupation of insured,29 or the age of the insured,30 or previous applications for insurance made by him,31 and in guaranty insurance the amount of losses in the preceding year,32 are all material and avoid the policy if false. The existence of a chattel mortgage has been held immaterial.33 So the warranty may involve a future fact which could not be the subject of fraud.34 The effect of the doctrine of warranties in insurance has been so oppressive that they are not favored in construction. Wherever consistent with the intention of the. parties a statement is construed as a representation rather than as a warranty.35 Even the use of the word "warrant" is not conclusive, if the context shows that the statement may be taken fairly as a representation.36 This result is reached by treating the warranty as a warranty of good faith only,37 especially where the insurer knows that the insured has no personal knowledge of the facts stated,38 unless it appears clearly that the insured intended to warrant the accuracy of his statements.

25Smith v. Ins. Co., 60 Vt. 682, 6 Am. St. Rep. 144, 1 L. R. A. 216, 15 Atl. 353. 26Aloe v. Life Association, 147 Mo. 561, 49 S. W. 553.

27Schofield's Admx. v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 79 Vt. 161, 64 Atl. 1107; Fraser v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 114 Wis. 510, 90 N. W. 476.

28 Supreme Lodge, Knights & Ladies of Honor v. Payne, 101 Tex. 449, 15 L. R. A. (N.S.) 1277, 108 S. W. 1160.

29 Triple Link, etc., Association v. Williams, 121 Ala. 138, 77 Am. St. Rep. 34, 26 So. 19.

30 Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Freed-man, 159 Mich. 114, 32 L. R. A. (N.S.) 298, 123 N. W. 547.

31 United States. Jeffries v. Ins. Co., 87 U. S. (22 Wall.) 47, 22 L. ed. 833; Security Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Webb, 106 Fed. 808, 55 L. R. A. 122, 45 C. C. A. 648.

Alabama. Kelly v. Clearing Co., 113 Ala. 453, 21 So. 361.

Massachusetts. Clapp v. Benefit Association, 146 Mass. 519, 16 N. E. 433.

Missouri. Aloe v. Life Association, 147 Mo. 561, 49 S. W. 553; Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Glaser, 245 Mo. 377, 45 L. R. A. (N.S.) 222, 150 S. W. 549.

Texas. Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Nichols (Tex. Civ. App.), 26 S. W. 998 [affirming 24 S. W. 910].

32 American, etc., Co. v. Mfg. Co., 95 Fed. Ill, 36 C. C. A. 671.

33 Light, etc., Co. v. Ins. Co., 105 Tenn. 480, 58 S. W. 851.

34 German Ins. Co. v. Russell', 65 Kan. 373, 58 L. R. A. 234, 69 Pac. 345; Liverpool, etc., Ins. Co. v. Lumber Co., 11 Okla. 585, 69 Pac. 938; Leonard v. Assurance Co., 24 R. I. 7, 96 Am. St. Rep. 698, 51 Atl. 1049; Findlay v. Ins. Co., 74 Vt. 211, 93 Am. St. Rep. 885, 52 Atl. 429.

35.United States. Moulor v. Ins. Co., Ill U. S. 335, 28 L. ed. 447; Kansas City First Nat. Bank v. Ins. Co., 95 U. S. 673, 24 L. ed. 563; McClain v. Assurance Society, 110 Fed. 80, 49 C. C. A. 31.

Illinois. Globe, etc., Ins. Association v. Wagner, 188 IM 133, 80 Am. St. Rep. 169, 52 L. R: A. 649, 58 N. E. 970 [affirming 90 III. App. 444].

Indiana. Rogers v. Ins. Co., 121 Ind. 570, 23 N. E. 498.

Maryland. Supreme Council v. Brash-ears, 89 Md. 624, 73 Am. St. Rep. 244, 43 Atl. 866.

Nebraska. Aetna Ins. Co. v. Simmons, 49 Neb. 811, 69 N. W. 125.

In order to protect innocent policy holders, legislation has provided in some states that to avoid the policy a representation,39 which is construed to include a warranty,40 or statements not essentially material which the parties agree on as materia,41 must be material; or that they must be made fraudulently.42 By statute in some jurisdictions, falsity of a warranty is ground for avoiding the policy only if made fraudulently or if it increases the risk.43 Other statutes make warranties as such inoperative unless the matter misrepresented actually contributes to the contingency on which the policy becomes due.44 Other statutes make warranties inoperative unless material and made fraudulently.45 Other statutes provide that statements in reliance on which a policy issues, shall be regarded as representations and not as warranties.46

36 Fidelity Mutual Life Association v. Jeffords, 107 Fed. 402, 53 L. R. A. 193, 46 C. C. A. 377; McClain v. Assurance Society, 110 Fed. 80, 49 C. C. A. 31; National Bank v. Ins. Co., 86 Cal. 497, 22 Am. St. Rep. 324, 26 Ac. 509; Globe, etc., Association v. Wagner, 188 111, 133, 80 Am. St. Rep. 169, 58 N. E. 970 [affirming 90 111. App. 444].

37 United States. Connecticut, etc., Ins. Co. v. Trust Co., 112 U. S. 250, 28 L. ed. 708; Moulor v. Ins. Co., 11l U. S. 335, 28 L. ed. 447; Union Mutual Ins. Co. v. Wilkinson, 80 U. S. (13 Wall.) 222, 20 L. ed. 617.

Alabama. Alabama Gold Life Ins. Co. v. Johnston, 80 Ala. 467, 60 Am. Rep. 112, 59 Am. Rep. 816, 2 So. 125.

Iowa. Teeple v. Fraternal Bankers' Reserve Soc., 179 la. 65, L. R. A. 1917C, 858, 161 N. W. 102.

New Jersey. Owen v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., 74 N. J. L. 770, 122 Am. St. Rep. 413, 67 Atl. 25.

New York. Bancroft v. Home Benefit Association, 120 N. Y. 14, 8 L. R. A. 68, 23 N. E. 997.

Pennsylvania. Home Mutual Life Association v. Gillespie, 110 Pa. St. 84, 1 Atl. 340.

Vermont. Stanyan v. Security Mut. Life Ins. Co., 91 Vt. 83, L. R. A. 1917C, 350, 99 Atl. 417.

38 lowa. Teeple v. Fraternal Bankers' Reserve Soc., 179 la. 65, L. R. A. 1917C, 858, 161 N. W. 102.

Illinois. Globe, eta., Ins. Association v. Wagner, 188 111. 133, 80 Am. St. Rep. 169, 52 L. R. A. 649, 58 N. E. 970.

New Jersey. Henn v. Ins. Co., 67 N. J. L. 310, 51 Atl. 689; Owen v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., 74 N. J. L. 770, 122 Am. St. Rep. 413, 67 Atl. 25.

Tennessee. Blackman v. U. S. Casualty Co., 117 Tenn. 578, 103 S. W. 784.

39 United States. Fidelity Mutual Life Association v. Miller, 92 Fed. 63, 34 C. C. A. 211.

Maryland. Supreme Council v. Bra-shears, 89 Md. 624, 73 Am. St. Rep. 244, 43 Atl. 866.

Massachusetts. Dolan v. Life Association, 173 Mass. 197, 53 N. E. 398.

Missouri. Jacobs v. Life Association, 142 Mo. 49, 43 S. W. 375.

Ohio. Insurance Co. v. Leslie, 47 O. S. 409, 9 L. R. A. 45, 24 N. E. 1072.

Pennsylvania. March v. Ins. Co. 186 Pa. St, 629. 66 Am. St Rep. 887, 40 Atl. 1100;

Tennessee. Light & Co. v. Ins. Co., 105 Tenn. 480, 58 S. W. 851.

Such a statute applies to mutual benefit societies: Supreme Council v. Brashears, 89 Md. 624, 73 Am. St. Rep. 244, 43 Atl. 866.

40 John Hancock, etc., Ins. Co. v. Warren, 181 U. S. 73, 45 L. ed. 755 [affirming 59 O. S. 45, 51 N. E. 546]; Fidelity Mutual Life Association v. Miller, 92 Fed. 63, 94 C. C. A. 211; Dolan v. Life Association, 178 Mass. 197, 53 N. E. 398.

The beneficial effect of all such statutes has been greatly lessened by holding that such provisions do not apply to conditions precedent to the attaching of liability under the policy.47 If the insurer takes advantage of a breach of warranty, by reason of which the policy never attached, it is not necessary that the insurer should repay to the insured the premiums which the insured has paid under such policy as a condition precedent to making such defense.48

41Continental Life Ins. Co. v. Chamberlain, 132 U. S. 304, 33 L. ed. 341; Fidelity Mutual Life Association ▼. Miller, 92 Fed. 63, 34 C. C. A. 211; White v. Assurance Society, 163 Mass. 108, 27 L. R. A. 398, 39 N. E. 771; Hermany v. Life Association, 151 Pa. St. 17, 24 Atl. 1064.

42 McCarty v. Ins. Co., 126 N. Car. 820, 36 S. E. 284; Albert v. Ins. Co., 122 N. Car. 92, 65 Am. St. Rep. 693, 30 S. E. 327.

43 Maryland Casualty Co. v. Gehr-mann, 96 Md. 694, 64 Atl. 678; Price v. Ins. Co., 90 Minn. 264, 95 N. W. 1118; First National Bank v. Guaranty Co., 110 Tenn. 10, 75 S. W. 1076.

44 Franklin Life Ins. Co. v. Galligan, 71 Ark. 295, 73 S. W. 102; Jenkins v. Ins. Co., 171 Mo. 375, 71 S. W. 688.

For the construction of similar statutes, see Penn, etc., Ins. Co. v. Trust Co., 72 Fed. 413, 38 L. R. A. 33, 19 C. C. A. 286; McGannon v. Ins. Co., 127 Mich. 636, 89 Am. St. Rep. 501, 54 L. R. A. 739, 87 N. W. 61; Hermany v. Life Association, 151 Pa. St. 17, 24 Atl. 1064. 45 John Hancock, etc., Ins. Co. v. Warren, 59 O. S. 45, 51 N. E. 546 [affirmed in John Hancock, etc., Ins. Co. v. Warren, 181 U. S. 73, 45 L. ed. 755].

46 Continental Casualty Co. v. Owen, 38 Okfe. 107, 131 Ac. 1084.

47 Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Howie, 62 O. S. 204, 56 N. E. 908.

48 Parsons v. Lane, 97 Minn. 98 [sub nomine: In re Millers' & Manufacturers' Ins. Co., 4 L. R. A. (N.S.) 231, 106 N. W. 486].