THE BNRIQUiE. 493 �than they did when orst questioned an this su1>]*€Ct. In tho midst of a storm of sach duration, with the pena broken down, the cattle loose and lying prostrate, and the seas washing over the deck, it is hardly to be supposed that a very critical examination of the beasts was made. �There is no suggestion that they were thrown overboard wantonly, and the effort of the libellant bas been to show, from statements alleged to havo been made to the drovers by the engineer, speaking for the «aptain, (whd could 'epeak hardly any English,) that he considered it essential to the safety of the shlp that the cattle should go, giving as the reason that, the pens having got loose, the whole deck load was liable to shift to one side with the violent rolling of the ship, and also because the cattle, having got out of the pens, were likely to become entangled with the rudder chains on the deck. If the statements' of these witnesses for the libel- lant are taken for trnth, they make a case in which the cattle were oast over to save the vessel, and indeed the whole evidence shows a condition of peril in which jettison of such a deck load was justifiable. In the arguinent by counsel the question of the liability of the ship-owners for contribution for jettison was fully argued.'and I iam inclined to think it is the principal issue in the case.' ■ �The language of the bill of lading is : "Steam-ship owners are not responsible for any loss that may ariso through cat- tle being jettisoned." This exemption, if the definition of' the Word "jettisoned" were siibstituted for the word itself, would read: "Ship-owners are not responsible fot any loss that may arise through cattle being voluntarily thrown bVer- board in case of extreme peril, in oirder to lighten the ship' aiid preserve her." �In Crooks v. Allen, L. E: 2 Q. B. Div. 38rand Schmidt v. SteamsMpCo. 45 L. I; Q. B. I)iv. 646, a bill of lading foi*' goods to be carried through to their destinatibii'by steain-ship and railroad contained an exception from loso by "fire on board." This was heild to' Mve reference toihe obligatidli Of ' the ship-owner as carrier onlf, and to his eOiitraet as Carrier' to deliver the goods, and as not intended to t'ake away the ��� �
