152 EXEMPTIONS FROM LIABILITY IN THE CONTRACT. 



that the wheat had been damaged by sea water, and that 

 through the negHgence of some of the crew one of the orlop- 

 deck j)oi*ts was insufficiently fastened, and that in con- 

 sequence the sea water was thereby admitted to the hold 

 after the ship had been five days at sea. It was held that 

 they were not liable in virtue of the exempting clause, and 

 that the exemption of their liability for negligence of the 

 crew was a perfectly lawful contract to make. The House of 

 Lords upon appeal held that if the circumstances which the 

 jury found in their verdict existed at the beginning of the 

 voyage the ship Avas then unseaworthy and the exceptions in 

 the bill of lading did not protect the shipowner as they do 

 not apply till the voyage has begun, and though they found 

 that the special verdict did not exhaust the case as it did 

 not find whether the ship was or was not seaworthy at the 

 commencement of the voyage, yet they held that the bill of 

 lading contained an implied undertaking of seaworthiness. (a) 

 Again, where a charter-party excluded the shipowners from 

 liability for " the accidents of navigation . . . even when 

 occasioned by the negligence " of their servants, but the 

 master neglected the duty of at once communicating the fact 

 of the accident to the pursuer, thereby depriving him of the 

 power of preventing further damage by immediately remov- 

 ing the cargo, it was held that the shipowners were on that 

 account liable for damage caused by the delay, but the 

 opinion was stated that the onus of proving that the damage 

 to the cargo had not been increased by the neglect of the 

 master to communicate the fact of the accident to the pur- 

 suer was upon the defenders. (6) 



119. The usual Exemptions from Liability in the Con- 

 tract. — The exemptions from liability var}^ of course with 

 each shij^ping company, and with the goods to be carried. 

 Those usual in an ordinary bill of lading are those arising 



(a) Sled and Croir, v. State Line Co., 1877, 4 R. 657 (H.L.) 103. 

 {b) Adam v. Morrig, 1890, 18 R. 153. 



