DISCRETION OF JUDGE AND JURY 39 



tenant can exchange timber cut on the premises for other 

 timber to use in repairs, if such course shows a clear saving 

 to the reversioner or remainderman; l and even that a 

 tenant may sell timber and use the proceeds to buy other 

 fencing material. 2 In accordance with the principles 

 above stated it has been held that a tenant by curtesy can- 

 not cut and sell trees merely for profit, 3 nor can he grant 

 to another a license to cut and remove timber; 4 but he 

 may work mines already opened 5 and undoubtedly may 

 use timber from the premises in reasonable amount for 

 such working. 



44. The Judge and Jury Exercise Broad Discretion. 



It is the duty of the court to define what constitutes waste 

 for this is a matter or law, 6 but the question whether 

 waste has been committed in a particular case is one of 

 fact which is to be determined by the jury, 7 except in 

 those cases in which the acts complained of are per se in- 

 jurious to the inheritance 8 or are clearly in violation of 

 an obligation which rests upon the tenant. 9 The question 



1. Loomis v. Wilbur, 5 Mason 13, 15 Fed. Gas. No. 8,498; Hixon v. Reaveley, 9 Ont. 



L. Rep. 6, 4 Ont. Wkly. Rep. 437; Contra Miller v. Shields, 55 Ind. 71 ; See King 

 v. Miller, 99 N. C. 583, 6 S. E. 660. Cf. U. S. v. Niemeyer, 94 Fed. 147 (Home- 

 stead in Ark. U. S. Land.) 



2. In re Williams, 1 Misc. (N. Y.) 35, 22 N. Y. Suppl. 906. 



3. Learned v. Ogden, 80 Miss. 769, 32 So. 278, 92 Am. St. Rep. 621; Cf. Xoyes v. 



Stone, 163 Mass. 490; Van Hoozer v. Van Hoozer, 18 Mo. App. 19; Joyner v. 

 Speed, 68 N. C. 236. 



4. McLeod v. Dial, 63 Ark. 10, 37 S. W. 306. 



5. Rose v. Hays, 1 Root (Conn.) 244;. in re Steele. 19 N. J. Eq. 120. Cf. Bond. v. 



Godsey 99 Va. 564, 39 S. E. 216, McCaulay v. Dismal Swamp Land Co 2 Rob. 

 (Va.) 507 (Timber cases ) 

 C. Van Syckel v. Emery, 18 N. J. Eq. 387. 



7. Me. Down v. Smith, 52 Me. 141; Hasty v. Wheeler, 12 Me. 43 1. 

 Md. Machcn v. Hooper, 73 Md. 342. 



Mass. Pynchon v. Stearns, 11 Met. 304, 45 Am. Dec. 207. 



Mo. Proffitt v. Henderson, 29 Mo. 325. 



N. H. Webster v. Webster, 33 N. H. 18, 66 Am. Dec. 705. 



N. J. Morehouse v. Cotheal, 22 N. J. L. 521. 



N. Y. McGregor v. Brown, 10 N. Y. 114; Harder v. Harder, 26 Barb. 409; Kidd 



v. Dennison, 6 Barb. 9; Jackson v. Andrew, 18 Johns. 431; Jackson v. 



Brownson, 7 Johns. 227, 5 Am. Dec. 258; Jackson v. Tibbitts, 3 Wend. 



341 ; See also Eysaman v. Small, 61 Hun, 618, 15 N. Y. Suppl. 288. 

 N. C. King v. Miller, 99 N. C. 583; Davis v. Gilliam, 5 Ired. Eq. (40 N. C.) 308; 



Ward v. Sheppard, 3 N. C. 283; 2 Am. Dec. 625. 

 Ohio. Crockett v. Crockett, 2 Ohio St. 180. 

 Pa. Lynn's Appeal, 31 Pa. St. 46, 72 Am. Dec. 721; McCullotigh v. Irvine, 13 



Pa. St. 438; Hastings v. Crunckleton, 3 Yeates, 261. 

 Vt. Keeler v. Eastman, 11 Vt. 293. 

 Eng. Young v. Spencer, 10 B. & C. 145, 21 E. C. L. 47; Doe v. Burlington, 5 



B. & Ad. 507, 27 E. C. L. 117; Phillips v. Smith, 14 M. & W. 595. 



8. McGregor v. Brown, 10 N. Y. 114. 



9. Ibid. See also Agate v. Lowenbein, 57 N. Y, 604. 



