54 THE RABBIT 



two sorts, viz. terrestres and aquatiles ; terrestres of 

 two sorts, silvestres and campestres ; campestres^ as 

 partridge, rail, quail, &c. ; silvestres^ as pheasant and 

 woodcock, &c. ; aquatiles^ as mallard, heme, &:c.' 

 The validity of this definition was questioned in a 

 celebrated case, the ' Duke of Devonshire v. Lodge ' 

 (7 B. and C. 36), in which the defendant was charged 

 with shooting grouse on land over which the plaintiff 

 claimed the right of free warren. The shooting was 

 admitted, and the only question to be decided by the 

 Court was whether a grouse was a bird of warren. 

 Manwood being considered a higher authority on the 

 Forest Laws than Coke, it was held that a grouse is 

 not a bird of warren. Lord Tenterden's judgment 

 in this case puts the matter very tersely and clearly. 

 He remarked, ' The franchise of free warren is of great 

 antiquity, and very singular in its nature. It gives a 

 property in wild animals (animals ferce naturcB), and 

 that property may be claimed in the land of another, 

 to the exclusion of the owner of the land. Such a 

 right ought not to be extended by argument and 

 inference to any animal not clearly within it. . . .' 

 Relying, therefore, upon Man wood's doctrine, he 

 non-suited the plaintiff. 



A right of free warren differs from the right of 

 forest, chase or park in that the latter implies the 



