Source: https://chestofbooks.com/real-estate/Law-Of-Real-Property/Profits-A-Prendre.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 18:47:35+00:00

Document:
233. A profit a prendre is a right exercised by one man in the land of another, accompanied by a participation in the profits of that land.
Profits a prendre have already been distinguished from easements as being a right to take a profit out of another man's land.168 These rights may be as various as the nature of the soil and the things which grow thereon or are imbedded in it will permit.169 For instance, there may be a right to mine for metals or for coal, a right to take wood or turf, or any other product of the land.170 Profits a prendre have to do with our system of law chiefly as rights of common. These rights of common were privileges which the lord of an English manor granted to his tenants to take certain profits from his waste land. The principal rights of common were (1) common of pasture, (2) common of turbary, (3) common of estovers, (4) common of piscary. The first, or common of pasture, wms a right in the tenants to turn their cattle out to graze on the lord's waste. The number of cattle which each tenant had a right to depasture was strictly regulated by the local customs.171 Commons of pasture are either appurtenant or appendant.172 The latter ex165 Magor v. Chadwick, 11 Adol. & E. 571.
166 Goodrich v. Burbank, 12 Allen (Mass.) 459; Bissell v. Grant, 35 Conn. 288. Cf. Amidon v. Harris, 113 Mass. 59.
167 See Goodrich v. Burbank, 12 Allen (Mass.) 459. So to enter and clean a railway for a mill. Prescott v. White, 21 Pick. (Mass.) 341.
168 Ante, p. 350. See, also, Race v. Ward, 4 El. & Bl. 702; Wlckham v. Hawker, 7 Mees. & W. 63.
169 a right to take water from a spring is not a profit & prendre. Race v. Ward, 4 El. & Bl. 702.
170 Waters v. Lilley, 4 Pick. (Mass.) 145; Tinicum Fishing Co. v. Carter, 61 Pa. St. 21; Hill v. Lord, 48 Me. 83.
171 Whitelock v. Hutchinson, 2 Moody & R. 205; Carr v. Lambert, L. R. 1 Exch. 168. 172 2 Bl. Comm. 33.
173 Anon., Y. B. 26 Hen. VIII., p. 4. pl. 15.
174 Cowlam v. Slack, 15 East, 108; Commissioners of Sewers v. Glasse, L. R. 19 Eq. 134; Baylls v. Tyssen-amhurst, 6 Ch. Div. 500.
175 2 Bl. Comm. 34. See Wilkinson v. Proud, 11 Mees. & W. 33; Caldwell v. Fulton, 31 Pa. St. 475; Massot v. Moses, 3 S. C. 168.
177 2 Bl. Comm. 34.
179 Parker v. People, 111 111. 581; Boatwrlght v. Bookman, 1 Rice (S. C.) 447. And see Case v. Weber, 2 Cart. (Ind.) 108.
180 Treary v. Cooke, 14 Mass. 488; Melvln v. Whiting, 7 Pick. (Mass.) 79; Smith v. Kemp, 2 Salk. 637; Benett v. Costar, 8 Taunt. 183; Seymour v. Courte-nay, 5 Burrows, 2814.
181 See Rivers v. Adams, 3 Exch. Dlv. 361; Chilton v. Corporation of London, 7 Ch. Div. 735.
182 Tottel v. Howell, Noy, 54; Duke of Somerset v. Fogwell, 5 Barn. & C. 875; Bailey v. Stephens, 12 C. B. (N. S.) 91; Pitt v. Chick, Hut. 45; Huntington v. Asher, 96 N. Y. 604. Common appendant can be acquired only by prescription. 2 Bl. Comm. 33. And see Smith v. Floyd, 18 Barb. (N. Y.) 522; Smith v. Gatewood, Cro. Jac. 152.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.