An easement may be acquired by the adverse user of another's land for a certain period, usually the same as that required to give title to land itself by disseisin or adverse possession. The acquisition of an easement in this manner is termed "prescription," and is based on the theory that if one makes use of another's land, not by permission, and the owner fails to interfere to prevent such use, such acquiescence is, in order to prevent litigation, and also to obviate the difficulty of proving title after lapse of time, to be considered as conclusive evidence that the user is rightful. The subject of prescription will bo considered in another part of this work.4

H. 338, disapproving Corporation of London v. Riggs, 13 Ch. Div. 798; Crotty v. New River & Pocahontas Consol. Coal Co., 72 W. Va. 68, 78 S. E. 233. Compare Higbee Fishing Club v. Atlantic Electric Co., 78 N. J. Eq. 434, 79 Atl. 326.

In Foeffees of Grammar School in Ipswich v. Proprietors of Jeffrey's Neck Pasture, 174 Mass. 572, it was said that the existence of a way of necessity was to be determined by the consideration whether any other mode of access was available for general purposes to meet the requirements of the uses to which the plaintiff's property would naturally be put.

3. Mitchell v. Seipel, 53 Md. 251.

3a. Lankin v. Terwilliger, 22 Ore. 97, 29 Pac. 268; U. S. v. Rindge, 208 Fed. 611.

3b. Board of Sup'rs of Lamar County v. Elliott, 107 Miss. 368. 66 So. 203.

4. Post, Sec.Sec. 514-533.

2 R. P. - 8

1310 Seal Property. [Sec. 365