LAW OF THE FARM. 303 



Whatever makes a man a trespasser from the beginning, in pursuing this 

 remedy, as by an unlawful impounding or shutting up, strips him of all right 

 to protection in anything which he has done, and constitutes him a wrong- 

 doer throughout and liable for damages. 



You will notice I have said nothing about the taking up of stray beasts or 

 cattle. I have simply confined this conversation to the distraining of beasts 

 doing damage. 



It is a remedy which is becoming more and more prevalent as the country 

 grows older, as a means of prompt redress for those trifling yet oft-repeated 

 injuries which will hardly brook "the law's delay" consistently with other 

 concerns. I have, therefore, mainly quoted from the statutes of the State in 

 which you and I live. These statutes, while they may be perfectly familiar 

 to any lawyer, and where he can put his hand on them at any moment, may 

 not be quite so accessible to most of you. I am not dropping these conversa- 

 tions with the Farmers' Club for the benefit of lawyers who have large libraries 

 at hand ; but to call your attention to what may be considered important 

 practical questions in common life, and I shall endeavor to put them in such 

 language as that you may understand them. 



LEOTURE NUMBER EIGHT. 



BOUNDARY LINES. 



Questions frequently arise among farmers respecting boundary lines. Corner 

 posts or monuments frequently disappear, and disputes arise, and a new 

 surveyor is called in to resurvey the land. Then disputes sometimes arise 

 after long acquiescence in an established line. Fences have been built on 

 what was supposed by both parties to be the true boundary line, and the 

 property occupied, improved and sold with reference to the line thus estab- 

 lished. Suddenly some adjacent owner discovers, or thinks he discovers, that 

 the line is not correct, that the fence or line as claimed is on him, and that 

 he is being deprived of a portion of his rightful inheritance. A surveyor is 

 called upon, who undertakes to regulate the matter. It is always competent 

 for the parties in such cases to choose a new surveyor and agree to abide by 

 the new survey. 



A dispute of this kind arose in Macomb county in 1845. The parties, by 

 mutual agreement, not in writing, employed a surveyor, who established the 

 line' between them, which was acquiesced in, and the parties occupied and 

 improved the land with reference to the line so established until 1864, when 

 one of them became dissatisfied and claimed that the line was on him about 

 six rods, and brought suit to recover. It was claimed that the agreement 

 under which the line vvas established in 1845 was void and of no binding force 

 because it was not in writing. The court held that when there has been an 

 honest difficulty in determining the lines between two neighboring proprietors, 

 and they have actually agreed by parole upon a certain boundary as the true 

 one, and have occupied accordingly, with visible monuments or divisions, the 

 agreement long acquiesced in shall not be disturbed, although the time has 

 not been suflScient to establish an adverse possession. It has been repeatedly 

 held by the courts that a boundary line long treated and acquiesced in as the 



