816 FESiI!IU.L BEPOBTEB. �The voyage from Calcutta to Boston was during the hot months in both hemispheres. Every precaution was taken on the pas- sage to diminish the heat of the hold by ventilation. The cutch was hoisted out of the hold and delivered on the wharf in the usual manner, by means of slings, and I can see no aegligence on the part of the respondents in that respect. �Upon the whole case, I am of the opinion that the shrink- age caused by the evaporation and melting of the cutch was owing to the inherent nature and quality of the article itself, and not to any negligence of the respondents, The authori- ties are numerous and conclusive that the ship owner is not responsible for loss to goods arising under such circum- stances, whether in bis relation as common carrier, or upon bills of lading in the f orm given in this case. Nelson v. Wood- ruff, 1 Black, 156; Brig Coleaberg,! Black, 170; Clark v. Bamwell, 12 How. 272 ; Lamh v. Parkman, 1 Sprague, 343 ; The Invincible, 1 Low. 225; Libby v. Gage, 14 Allen, 261. �Libel dismissed, with costs. ����
