MORRIS, J. - (1.)THEIR Lordships do not require to hear counsel in support of the decision of the High Court, as they are of opinion that there has been no case shown to alter the judgment that was pronounced by that Court.
(2.)IT appears that the jute in question was put on board the appellants' vessel, and put on board, so far as can be ascertained, in a proper manner, in a proper flat, properly arranged, and under proper circumstances. It appears that upon the night in question, about half-past twelve, from some rather incomprehensible cause or other, the jute caught fire, and the whole cargo was burnt.
The plaintiffs do not rely upon any special construction of the forwarding note other than that which is relied upon by the defendants, who contend that they have brought themselves within the protection of the Carriers Act; that is, that they are exempt if they satisfy the onus which is imposed upon them of showing that there was no negligence on their part.

(3.)THE plaintiffs have also given up any question as to holding the defendants liable on the ground of having deviated from the agreement, and, therefore, the question comes to the simple and-in form, at all events-narrow one: whether the defendants have exonerated themselves by showing that there was no negligence on their part.