Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1879-01-01

| TREsPAssING ON THE FARM.
1t is often thought that if person simply
crosses your land for twenty years he thereby
always acquires right to continue the prac-
tice but this, far from being universally
true, the very foundation of acquiring such
a right -prescriptive right, as it is called-is
| that the crossing must have been adversely
to the land owner, contrary to his wishes,
or at least without his permission, express
| or implied and under claim of legal
right so to do, whether the farmer is willing
or not. If therefore the person crossing
does so with permission, or by the mere in
diligence of the landowner, and not under
any claim of right, it is wholly immaterial
| how long the custom has continued. Forty
years travel by consent of the owner would
not give any right to continue TO pass after
he had been forbidden to do so. And to
avoid any misapprehension in such cases, it
is wise for the farmer to put up notice for
| bidding it, as we so often see done. And
this not only makes it clear that thencefor-
ward the intruder is trespasser, but by
recent law in this state he is made liable to
a fine of twenty dollars for wilfully crossing
or entering upon any garden, orchard, now
| ing land, or other improved land between
the first day of April and the first day of
December est. 1876, C. 1917. BY this
law the wilful trespassng on such lands
during the summer and fall months
| is made a crime, and any constable or
| or other officer may arrest the offender on
| the spot and take him before some proper
tribunal for trial and sentence. But to all
other seasons of the year, or as to any other
kinds of lands, such a trespass is only
| civil trespass, not crime, and the only le-
gal remedy is by an action for damages
done, which may be very unsatisfactory. If,
however, mans object in coming into your
premises is TO steal your fruit, cranberries or
other crops, that itself is a crime, although
he does not accomplish his purpose, and
you may put him out by force, after notice
to leave, using no unnecessary violence. But
you cannot lawfully set spring guns, man
traps or other instruments which may do
him grievous bodily harm, without giving
| notice of such hidden dangers G. Bing, 62S;
81 Iowa, 6l3). The old school books in my
early days had picture of boys stealing
fruit in the boughs of an apple tree, with a
farmer picking up stones, and maxim that
If words and grass did not answer he might
throw stones; but if you should happen to
put out the boys eye it might go hard with
you, for you have not right even TO kill
your neighbours hens while scratching up
your melons and cucumbers. The custom
to do so, and toss the fowls over the fence,
may afford some satisfaction to the gardner
but it may make him liable to pay the full
value of the nusances although he had re-
peatedly warned the owner to keep them at
home, or take the consequences "a Conn,
/ 107 Mass, 1860 Whether this rule APP
plies to an old cat which is after ones chick
ems | don't know, but ! mean to try it the
first chance have. One of the most an.
noying forms of trespass to the farmer is
that of hunting and fishing. Many persons
seem to suppose that, by force of some gen
eral custom or otherwise, they have right
to hunt or fish over another's ground as they
please, but this is quite erroneous (Pick.,
| l45). In all ordinary streams and ponds
the right TO fish belongs solely to the person
owning the adjoining land. If the stream
is navigable, that is, if the tide GIBBS and
flows, the public have a right to boat up
and down it, and to fish from their boats,
but not TO go on shore to do it. And by
very early law in Massachusetts,, if farm
contains "great pond ii. e., pond con-
tanning over ten acres--the public have
right of fishing and fowling there, "and
may pass and repass on foot through any
mans property for that end, so they tres
pass not on any mans corn or meadow
The recent laws authorizing fish commits
| oiohtio W icaoc ioiSc pohho W pllNdtc parties
may of course modify the former rights of
the public therein. As to salt water fishing
the law is somewhat peculiar, for although
the owner of the upland ordinarily owns the
land down to low water mark, as before
stated, yet any other person may go there
and dig clans or other shell fish, if he can
do so by water, and without crossing the
upland in going or returning 6 Cush,,
3i7 Gray, 440.) The legislature may
sometimes abridge or modify this right but
the ordinary rule is above stated.
FINALLY.
The question often arises who owns the
fruit of tree standing near the boundary
line between two proprietors 1t is gener-
ally supposed that the fruit on the limbs
overhanging ones land belongs to him, but
this is an entire mistake. II tree stands
wholly on your land, although some of the
roots extend into the soil of your neighbor,
and derive support and nourishment from
his soil, he has no right to any of the fruit
which hangs over the line N Conn, III
38 VT, 1856 25 N. Y, 1860, And if he at
tempts by force to prevent you from pick
ing it he is liable for an assault and battery
,, Gao Bart, $3.50 As N. Y, POD. In one in
stance lady, while standing on the fence
picking cherries which hung over the line,
was forbidden to do so by the adjoining
, owner, who was at work in his garden, and
in the scuiile to prevent her, she received
some bruises on her arm, for which he had