336 TRANSACTIONS OF ROYAL SCOTTISH ARBORICULTURAL SOCIETY. 
L.T. 383, in which an injunction was granted against cutting 
timber, but in that case the security was admittedly insufficient. 
The only Scotch case referred to was that of Macgueen v. Tod, 
6th July 1899, 1 Fr. 1069. This was a case in which a curator 
bonis was in possession on behalf of an heir of entail, who was 
insane and was eighty-five years of age, and it was accordingly 
held that it was the duty of the curator bonis to preserve the 
estate as he found it. Lord Kincairney goes orf:—‘In truth 
I do not see that in cutting his woods he (the proprietor) has 
done anything wrong at all, or that any exception can be taken 
to what he has done and his mode of doing it; and I think, so 
long as he keeps within his legal rights, there is no ground for 
interfering with him from apprehension of what he may do in 
the future.” ; 
It will be seen from the above that the principle laid down 
by the institutional writers was clearly in the mind of Lord 
Kincairney, viz., that the woods were looked upon as part of the 
estate. 
REFORM SUGGESTED. 
The alteration required on the law is the adoption of the 
principle that where woods are being managed under a proper 
working-plan, approved of by some responsible authority (such 
as the proposed Board of Forestry), they should be looked upon, 
not as part of the land as at present, but as a crop. ‘The old 
principle should still be maintained, however, where the woods 
are not so managed, or are merely there for amenity, shelter, or 
as game preserves. 
