away his dominion by the power of disposition he Timber has over personal property so long before he has directed to be felled. it over real estate. The court, therefore, with reference to his situation, even during infancy, as to his powers over property, works the change not to all intents and purposes, but with this qualification, that if he lives he may take it as real estate; but without prejudice to his right over it during infancy as personal property.

"A lunatic stands quite on a different footing, as the instant of a lucid interval he has precisely the same powers of disposition over one species of property as over the other, in different modes and forms I admit. The Lord Chancellor, acting under a special commission from the crown, does what is for his benefit; taking the advice and assistance of the presumptive next of kin and heir, as to the management of the property that may or may not be their own."

His Lordship in that case mentioned an instance of a lunatic seised ex-parte paternâ of estate A. and ex-parte maternâ of estate B. the latter being subject to a mortgage; and timber cut upon A. having been applied in discharge of a mortgage upon B. it was on a question between the heirs held, that A. was not to be recouped.

Timber directed to be felled.

Distinct

betwee estates infants lunatic

CHAPTER XI.

Injunctions to stay Purprestures and Nuisances.

THE jurisdiction of Courts of Equity in cases of Purpresture and Nuisance, though not very frequently exercised, is undoubted. It is founded on the right to restrain the exercise or the erection of that, from which irreparable damage to individuals, or great public injury, would ensue (a).

Purpresture, or more properly Pourpresture, is derived from the French word pourprise, and, according to Lord Coke, signifies a close or enclosure, that is, when one encroacheth, or makes that several to himself which ought to be common to many (b). It is laid down by all the old writers, that it might be committed either against the king, the lord of the fee, or any other subject (c); but in its common acceptation, it is at present understood to mean any encroachment upon the king, either upon part of the demesne lands, or in the highways, rivers, harbours, or streets (d).

The remedy for this species of injury is either by Information of intrusion at common law, or by In

(a) 3 Atk. 751. Redes. Tr. 117.

(b) 2 Inst. 38.

(c) Skene verbo, Pourpresture, and see the references in Mr. Beames's note to Glanville, lib. 9. c. 11. p. 239.

(d) 2 Inst. 38. 272. Spelm. Gloss. Purpresture, Hale de Portibus Maris. Harg. Law Tr. 84.

formation at the suit of the Attorney General in of injunc-
equity. In case of a judgment upon an informa- tions to stay
Purpres-
tion of intrusion, the erection complained of, whe- tures.
ther it were a nuisance or not, was abated: but
upon a decree upon an information in equity, if it
appeared to be a purpresture, without being at the
same time a nuisance, the court might direct an
inquiry whether it was most beneficial to the crown
to abate the purpresture, or to suffer the erections
to remain, and be arrented (a). But where the
pur-
presture was also a nuisance, this could not be done,
for the crown cannot sanction a nuisance: it has no
right to use its title to the soil as a nuisance, nor
`to place upon that soil what will be a nuisance to
the crown's subjects, nor give such right to its as-
signee (b). There are accordingly several early
cases in the Exchequer, some of which are noticed
by Lord Hale in his treatise de Portibus Maris, in
which purprestures, which were also nuisances, had
been committed, and decrees were made upon the
application either of the attorney general, or the
grantees of the crown, to abate them (c). Upon these
authorities the Court of Exchequer proceeded in the
year 1795, where the defendants had erected certain

(a) 2 Anst. 606. Redes. Tr. 117. There is an incorrectness in Callis's reading on the Statute of Sewers, 174. where he states a purpresture to be that species of offence done to the king immediately, or his possessions, which if done to a subject would be a nuisance.

(b) Ib. 2 Wils. Ch. Rep. 101. Rex v. Earl Grosvenor, 2 Stark. N. P. C. 511.

(c) Attorney General v. Philpot, 8 Car. 1. cit. Anst. 607. City of Bristol v. Morgan, Hale de Portibus Maris, Harg. Law Tracts, 81. Town of Newcastle v. Johnson, ib.

1

Purpresture.

CHAPTER XI.

Of Injunctions to stay Purprestures and Nuisances.

THE jurisdiction of Courts of Equity in cases of Purpresture and Nuisance, though not very frequently exercised, is undoubted. It is founded on the right to restrain the exercise or the erection of that, from which irreparable damage to individuals, or great public injury, would ensue (a).

Purpresture, or more properly Pourpresture, is derived from the French word pourprise, and, according to Lord Coke, signifies a close or enclosure, that is, when one encroacheth, or makes that several to himself which ought to be common to many (b). It is laid down by all the old writers, that it might be committed either against the king, the lord of the fee, or any other subject (c); but in its common acceptation, it is at present understood to mean any encroachment upon the king, either upon part of the demesne lands, or in the highways, rivers, harbours, or streets (d).

The remedy for this species of injury is either by Information of intrusion at common law, or by In

(a) 3 Atk. 751. Redes. Tr. 117.

(b) 2 Inst. 38.

(c) Skene verbo, Pourpresture, and see the references in Mr. Beames's note to Glanville, lib. 9. c. 11. p. 239.

(d) 2 Inst. 38. 272. Spelm. Gloss. Purpresture, Hale de Portibus Maris. Harg. Law Tr. 84.

formation at the suit of the Attorney General in of injunc-
equity. In case of a judgment upon an informa- tions to stay
Purpres-
tion of intrusion, the erection complained of, whe- tures.
ther it were a nuisance or not, was abated: but
upon a decree upon an information in equity, if it
appeared to be a purpresture, without being at the
same time a nuisance, the court might direct an
inquiry whether it was most beneficial to the crown
to abate the purpresture, or to suffer the erections
to remain, and be arrented (a). But where the pur-
presture was also a nuisance, this could not be done,
for the crown cannot sanction a nuisance: it has no
right to use its title to the soil as a nuisance, nor
to place upon that soil what will be a nuisance to
the crown's subjects, nor give such right to its as-
signee (b). There are accordingly several early
cases in the Exchequer, some of which are noticed
by Lord Hale in his treatise de Portibus Maris, in
which purprestures, which were also nuisances, had
been committed, and decrees were made upon the
application either of the attorney general, or the
grantees of the crown, to abate them (c). Upon these
authorities the Court of Exchequer proceeded in the
year 1795, where the defendants had erected certain

(a) 2 Anst. 606. Redes. Tr. 117. There is an incorrectness in Callis's reading on the Statute of Sewers, 174. where he states a purpresture to be that species of offence done to the king immediately, or his possessions, which if done to a subject would be a nuisance.

(b) Ib. 2 Wils. Ch. Rep. 101. Rex v. Earl Grosvenor, 2 Stark. N. P. C. 511.

(c) Attorney General v. Philpot, 8 Car. 1. cit. Anst. 607. City of Bristol v. Morgan, Hale de Portibus Maris, Harg. Law Tracts, 81. Town of Newcastle v. Johnson, ib.

1