42 
NATURE NOTES. 
which the stream could be crossed. Aged witnesses, however, 
declared that there once used to be a plank across the stream, 
and that sometimes it would get Washed away, and had to be 
brought back. But this evidence, coupled with the fact that the 
stream could at most times be jumped, did not appear to have 
so much weight as th^t tendered to the effect that, when the 
Yeomanry crossed the stream on their way to their rifle-range, 
a horse upon one or two occasions got “bogged,” ^nd had to be 
pulled out of the mud. Now, considering that there was not 
the least suggestion of claiming the path as a hridle-path, it was 
difficult to gather what this had to do with the case at all, and 
yet it was put forward without protest as one of the reasons for 
disallowing the claim. The very fact of the path at this point 
being a bad one — so bad, indeed, that probably no. one but a 
farm-labourer in thick boots and gaiters would dream of using it 
in wet weather — is a fair reason for assuming that it had been 
neglected, perhaps almost entirely disused, for several decades 
of years. And how does it then follow, as was inferred, that the 
remainder of the path, in order to be a public one, should be 
plainly defined or easily recognisable ? What rambler among 
the bye-ways of the country could not point to a dozen such 
faintly-defined and impassable though public paths ? — paths 
which are a disgrace to the authorities who should look after 
them ; and, for my own part, I entirely dissent from, the suggestion 
that a horse getting “ stuck in the mud ” is conclusive evidence 
that a pedestrian is bound to follow his example. It is an old 
saying that “ What is everybody’s business is nobody’s busi- 
ness,” and to nothing does this apply more forcibly than to the 
keeping in repair of public stiles, foot-bridges, and field-paths. 
Another point of which much was made was as to the “ repu- 
tation ” of the path — “ Was it spoken of as a public path ? ” and 
so on. The old fellows to whom this question was put hardly 
seemed to realise its meaning; and undoubtedly if a path is a 
public path, it is not “spoken of” at all, until the right of way 
along it is contested.. The only reputation in the present case 
appeared to be one pf neglect. Therefore, assuming even that 
there was a recognized right of waj' across the stream at some 
time or other, it is highly improbable that many of the younger 
generation would have known of such. Hence the difficulty 
of attempting to establish the right, the more especially as the 
old stiles and way-marks had rotted away and not been renewed 
— for I think there was mention of at least one stile having 
formerly been in existence. 
Then as to locked gates. Evidence was given against the 
alleged right of way in that there used to be across the path a 
gate which was occasionally locked. This, indeed, appears to 
have practically settled the case, and it undoubtedly seems only 
reasonable that if a landlord can put up a gate and lock it, with- 
out any opposition being raised to the act, a very strong indica- 
tion is thereby afforded that the road or path thus shut off is 
