RESPONSIBILITY OF CARRIERS BY WATER. 145 



explosion, (ft) and there must be no deviation from the usual 

 course of the voyage,(6) and the vessel must be reasonably 

 fitted and prepared for the carriage of animals. Thus, where 

 a vessel which had carried cattle with foot-and-mouth 

 disease was not properly cleansed before a fresh lot were 

 put on board, and, owing to this, they took the disease and 

 died, the shipowners were found liable in damages, (c) 



A common carrier by sea is not liable at common law for 

 loss which is the result of inevitable accident caused by the 

 act of God, the Queen's enemies,(cZ) or inherent vice of the 

 horse carried, unless aggravated by himself (e) or by the 

 fault of the consignor or his servants travelling along with 

 the horse conveyed. Perils of the sea,(/) when unavoidable, 

 come under the category of accidents, and are a valid defence 

 to the carrier, but they cannot be pleaded in answer to a 

 claim of damage caused by deviation from the usual course 

 of the voyage. ((/) Perils of the sea include such unavoidable 

 dangers as stress of weather, winds, waves, lightning and 

 tempests, rocks, sand banks, collisions, (/i) and a common 

 carrier is not bound to restore what is thrown overboard for 

 common safety.(i) The exceptions, however, do not excuse 

 the carrier where he has deviated from the course of the 

 voyage,(^') or has been negligent, (A;) or has failed to obviate 

 loss when it was m his power to do so ; (l) nor where the loss 

 is caused by the ship's unseaworthiness, (m) 



(a) B. Pr. 167. 



(b) Davis V. Garrett, 1830, 6 Bing. 716. 



(c) Tattersall v. N. Steamship Co., 1884, L.R. 12 Q.B.D. 297. 

 {d) § 108, p. 135, note (a). 



(c) § 109 ; Carver, § 13. 



{/) See Abbot, 13th ed., p. 450, et seq. 



(g) B. Pr. 241 ; as to onus shifting in case of stress of weather, see WiUiains v. 

 Dohic, 1884, 11 R. 982. 



{h) Carver, § 93. 



(0 Ibid. § 15. 



{j ) Davis, cit. 



(k) Phillips V. Clarlc, 1857, 2 C.B., N.S. 156 ; Siordct v. ILdl, 1S2S, 4 Bing. 607. 



(I) Notara s. Henderson, 1872, L.R. 7 Q.B. 225; The Freedom, 1871, L.R. 3 

 P.O. 594. 



(»i) Steel V. State Line S. S. Co., 1877, 3 L.R. App. Ca. 72. 



L 



