1803. Review of Mr BcWs Treat'ifc on Lcafes. 337 



In confulcring the manner of enforcing plans of management 

 of farms contained in leafes, Mr Bell takes a full view of the 

 form of a leafe propoied by l^ord Kaimes, with Dr Anderfon's 

 remarks on that fubjecl: in the (General View of the Agriculture 

 of Aberdeenfliire ; and he alfo confiders at fome length the obli- 

 gation on a tenant, by his leafe, to remove without warning, and 

 feems to confider obligations for additional rent itipulatcd to fe- 

 cure a removal as unneceirary ; though fueh are fullained by our 

 Courts of law, as well as thofe for fecuring a plan of manage- 

 ment. 



The Fourth Chapter treats of t\-\Q verbal leafe, wliieh is effec- 

 tual but for one year ; of the obligation to grant a leafe 5 of the 

 informal leafe ; and the circumfiinces which may render an in- 

 formal leafe binding. 



Chapter Fifth treats of the rights arifing to parties from the 

 contract of leafe. Two prominent articles taken notice of in this 

 chapter are, thofe of ilraw and dung on the hand of a tenant at 

 tlie end of a leafe ; a fubjeft that has been fully confidered in 

 our laft volume : and as much the fame principles are ftated by 

 Mr Bell as there laid down, it feems here unncceilary to enter on 

 any detail. 



The landlord's right of hypothec is alfo confidered In every 

 point of viev/ : cafes alfo of fterility or calamity, and the tenant's 

 zntereft in the furface, with the landlord's right to mines and 

 minerals, including kelp, ihell marl, pipeclay, &c. and privilege 

 to hunt on the farm, arc elucidated. On this lad topic, the n^- 

 marks of Mr Bell fliall be prefented to the reader. 



* Befides tiie fruits, the tenant has right to the temporary ufe and 

 enjoyment of the farm ; and the leafe mull enable him to exclude all 

 others from entering qn the grounds, in the fame manner that the laird- 

 lord himfelf might have done. 



* The right of property in lands implies, beyond all queftion, an ex- 

 clufive right of polfefiien. The proprietor may prevent all and fundry 

 from entering on his lands. Of this we have a llrong inlhmce in the 

 cafe of the Earl of Breadalbane v, Livinglion, June 16. 1790. Mr 

 Livingfton, a gentleman of conllderable landed property, and fully qua- 

 iilied by law to iiunt, had hunted for fome days in the moors belong- 

 ing to the Earl of Breadalbane. Thefe moors were unenclofed, fo that 

 Mr Livingllon being qualified, and having entered no enclofure, the 

 queftion which wa§ decided betwixt him and the Earl, was a queftion 

 as to the power inherent in a proprietor of excluding all others from 

 entering on his property j and the Court found that Mr Livingfton had 

 no title to enter the Earl's moors, and decerned in a declarator to that 

 effe6l ; not only fo, but they gave expences againft Mr Livingfton, a 

 judgment which was affirmed in the Houfe of Peers. 



* This cafe, though arifing from a claim for liberty to hunt, is appli- . 

 pable to every cafe of an entry on the lands of a proprietor for recren- 



B h h ^ ti'-n 



