the judgment of the court below in ordering a new trial. There was some evidence given pointing to the possibility of the fire having originated from fire escaping from the ash pan, in which case they might not, it may be, have found the defendants chargeable with negligence.
The attention of the jury should, I think, have been drawn to this point. In view also of the divers alternative suggestions of negligence causing the fire alleged in the statement of claim it would have been better if the jury had been simply asked to say from what cause, in their opinion, the fire did in fact take place, and whether it was attributable to any, and if any, what ne'gligence of the defendants. J.-I agree that the appeal should be dismissed.
Appeal dismissed with costs.