44 LEGAL WASTE OF TIMBER 



the law as administered in England to prevent the conver- 

 sion of woodland into arable land or pasturage even though 

 the value of the estate be increased 1 does not find favor 

 in American courts which, in the absence of special obliga- 

 tions on the part or the tenant to refrain from cutting tim- 

 ber, will consider whether the clearing has been such as a 

 prudent farmer would make, having regard to the land as 

 an inheritance, and whether such clearing has as a matter 

 of fact, and not in theory, alonej diminished the value of 

 the land as an estate. 2 The custom of the neighborhood 



(Foot note 5 concluded from preceding page) 



Davison, 4 Barb. 109; McGregor v. Brown, 10 N. Y. 114; Jackson v. 



Brownson, 7 Johns. 227, 5 Am. Dec. 258; Elwell v. Burnside, 44 Barb. 



447; Jackson v. Tibbitts, 3 Wend. 341. 

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



Parkins v. Cox, 2 Hayw. (3 N. C.) 283, 2 Am. Dec. 625; Crawley v. 



Timberlake, 2 Ired. Eq. (37 N. C.) 46O; Sherrill v. Conner. 107 N. C. 



630, 12 8. E. 588. . 

 Ohio. Crockett v. Crockett, 2 Ohio St. 180; Hall v. Rohr, 10 O. Dec. (Reprint) 



690, 23 Cin. L. Bui. 121. 

 Pa. McCullough v. Irvine, 13 Pa. St. 438; Lynn's Appeal, 31 Pa. St. 44, 72 Am. 



Dec. 721; Givens v. McCalmont, 4 Watts. 460; Hastings v. Crunckleton, 



3 Yeates (Pa.) 261; Morris v. Knight, 14 Pa. Super, Ct. 324; Sayers v. 



Hoskinson, 110 Pa. St. 473. 1 Atl. 308; Beam v. Woolridge, 3 Pa. Co. 



Ct. 17. 



R. 1. Clemence v. Steere, 1 R. I. 272, 53 Am. Dec. 621. 

 S. C. Smith v. Poyas, 2 Desaus. 65; Hancock v. Day, McMull. Eq. 69, 36 Am. 



Dec. 293 ; Johnson v. Johnson, 2 Hill Eq. 277, 29 Am. Dec. 72. 

 Tenn. Lunn v. Oslin, 96 Tenn. 28; Owen v. Hyde, 6 Yerg. 334, 27 Am. Dec. 467. 

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

 Va. Findlay v. Smith, 6 Mum*. 134, 8 Am. Dec. 733; Crouch v. Puryear, 1 Rand. 



258. 10 Am. Dec. 528. 



Wis. Wilkinson v. Wilkinson, 59 Wis. 557, 18 N. W. 513. 

 U. 8. Loomis v. Wilbur, 5 Mason (U. S.) 13. 

 Can. Titus v. Sulis, 9 Nova Scotia 497 ; Saunders v. Breakie, 5 Ont. 603 ; Drake 



v. Wigle, 24 U. C. C. P. 405. 

 Eng. Arthur v. Lamb, 2 Dr. & Son 428, 12 L. T. Rep. N. S. 338, 62 Eng. Reprint 



683. 



1. But see, Meux v. Cobley (1892) 2 Ch. 253, 



2. Ga. Woodward v. Gates. 38 Ga. 205. 

 111. Bond v. Lockwood, 33 111. 212. 

 Ind. Dawson v. Coffman, 28 Ind. 220. 

 Me. Drown v. Smith, 52 Me. 141. 



Mich. Hogan v. Hogan, 102 Mich. 641, 61 N. W. 73. 



Miss. Cannon v. Barry, 59 Miss. 289; Warren Co. v. Gans, 80 Miss. 76, 31 So. 



539; Moss Point Lumber Co. v. Board of Supr. Harrison Co., 89 Miss. 



448, 42 So. 290. 



Mo. Davis v. Clark, 40 Mo. App. 515. 

 Nebr. Disher v. Disher, 45 Neb. 100, 63 N. W. 368. 

 N. H. 'Chase v. Hazelton, 7 N. H. 171. 

 N. Y. Jackson v. Brownson, 7 Johns 227, 5 Am. Dec. 258. 

 N. C. Davis v. Gilliam, 40 N. C. (5 Ired. Eq.) 308. 

 Pa. Morris v. Knight, 14 Pa. Super. Ct. 324. 

 S. C, Thompson v. Bostwick, McMull. Eq. 85; Hancock v. Day, McMull, Eq. 



69, 36 Am. Dec. 293. 

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

 Wis. Wilkinson v. Wilkinson, 59 Wis. 557, 18 N. W. 513. 



