CARRYING HORSES. 267 



A verdict was entered for the plaintiff for 31/. lO^., 

 leave being reserved to the defendants to move to enter the 

 verdict for them, the Court to have power to draw inferences 

 of fact. A rule having been obtained accordingly, the 

 Court held, drawing inferences of fact (Martin and Bram- 

 well, BB., Pigott, B., dissenting), that the defendants 

 were not liable, since it was to be inferred that the injuries 

 resulted from the proper vice of the Horse. Bramwell, B., 

 saying, " There is no doubt that the Horse was the imme- 

 diate cause of its own injuries. That is to say, no person 

 got into the box and injured it. It slipped, or fell, or 

 kicked, or plunged, or in some way hurt itself. If it did 

 so from no cause other than its inherent propensities, ' its 

 j)roper vice,' that is to say, from fright, or temper, or 

 struggling to keep its legs, the defendants are not liable. 

 But if it so hurt itself from the defendants' negligence, or 

 any misfortune happening to the train, though not through 

 any negligence of the defendants, as, for instance, from 

 the horse-bos leaving the line owing to some obstruction 

 maliciously put upon it, then the defendants would, as 

 insurers, be liable. If perishable articles, say soft fruit, 

 are damaged by their own weight and the inevitable 

 shaking of the carriage, they are injured through their 

 own intrinsic qualities. If through pressure of other 

 goods carried with them, or by an extraordinary shock or 

 shaking, whether through negligence or not, the carrier is 

 liable. Since this was ^VTitten, the case of The Great 

 Wedern Rail. Co. v. Blower {p) has been decided in the 

 Common Pleas to this effect." 



In Nugent v. Smith (7) a common carrier by sea from Rule applies 

 London to Aberdeen received a Mare to be carried to to Common 

 Aberdeen for hire. In the course of the voyage the ship gg™^^^ ^^ 

 encountered rough weather, and the Mare received such 

 injuries that she died. The Jury found that the injuries 

 were caused partly by more than ordinary bad weather, 

 and partly by the conduct of the Mare herself by reason of 

 fright and consequent struggling, without any negligence 

 of the carrier's servants. It was held that the carrier was 

 not liable for the death of the Mare, on the ground that a 

 carrier does not insure against the irresistible act of nature, 

 nor against defects in the thing carried itseK ; and if he 

 can show that either the act of nature, or the defect of the 



(ja) Ante, p. 265. J.,C.P.G97; 34 L. T., N. S. 827— 



q) L. R., 1 C. P. D. 423 ; 45 L. C. A. 



