When merely a right of user for the benefit of the public is taken, and subsequently such user ceases, the owner of the land has it free from the public burden.14 Logically, in such a case, the corporation, which acquired the right of user for one public purpose, having abandoned that mode of user, could not utilize the land, or authorize it to be utilized, for a different public purpose, without payment of the value of the right of user for this latter purpose.15 There appears, however, to be a disposition occasionally to allow such change of user subject to the payment to the owner of the land of the amount by which the burden of the new user exceeds that of the original user.16 If not merely a right of user, but the "fee," as it is expressed, is taken, that is, if the ownership of the land is acquired for a public purpose, under the power of eminent domain, the fact that it ceases to be used for that purpose does not ordinarily affect the title, and the corporation which acquired the property may utilize it for other purposes, or may dis pose of it, as may be most to its advantage.17 It may

Co., 94 N. Y. 287: Lycoming Gas & Water Co. v. Moyer, 99 Pa. St. 615; Gillison v. Savannah & C. R. Co., 7 Rich. (S. C.) 173; Kittell v. Missisquoi R. Co., 56 Vt. 96; 2 Lewis, Eminent Domain, Sec. 885.

14. See Heard v. Brooklyn, 60 N. Y. 242; Pittsburgh & Lake Erie R. Co. v. Bruce, 102 Pa. 23.

15. See editorial note 22 Harv. Law Rev. 439.

16. See Hatch v. Cincinnati & Indiana R. Co., 18 Ohio St. 92;

Malone v. Toledo, 28 Ohio St. 643; Lucas v. Ashland Light, Mill & Power Co., 92 Neb. 550, 138 N. W. 761.

17. Frank v. Evansville, & I. R. Co., Ill Ind. 132, 12 N. E. 105; Sweet v. Buffalo, N. Y. & P. Ry. Co., 79 N. Y. 293; Eld-ridge v. City of Binghamton, 120 N. Y. 309, 24 N. E. 462; Currie v. New York Transit Co., 66 N. J. Eq. 313, 58 Atl. 308; Malone v. Toledo, 28 Ohio St. 643; State v. Griftner, 61 Ohio St. 201, 55 N. E. 612; Wyoming conceivably occur, however, that by force of the statute under which the land is taken for public use, a determinable fee only is acquired by the corporation exercising the right of condemnation, limited in effect to endure only so long as the land is utilized for the particular purpose.18

Coal & Transport Co. v. Price, 81 Pa. St. 156; Chamberlain v. Northeastern R. Co., 41 S. C. 399, 44 Am. St. Rep. 717, 25 L. R. A. 139, 19 S. E. 743, 996; Seattle Land & Imp. Co. v. Seattle, 37 Wash. 274, 79 Pac. 780; Hays v. Walnut Creek Oil Co., 75 W. Va. 263, Ann. Cas. 1918A, 802, 83 S. E. 900.

18. Lithgow v. Pearson, 28 Colo. App. 70, 135 Pac. 759; Benham v. Potter, 52 Conn. 248: Chambers v. Great Northern Power Co., 100 Minn. 214, 110 N. W. 1128; Chicago & E. I. R. Co. v. Clapp, 201 111. 418, 66 N. E. 223; Mccombs v. Stewart, 40 Ohio St. 647; Lazarus v. Morris, 212 Pa. St. 128, 61 Atl. 815; Canadian River R. Co. v. Wichita Falls & N. W. Ry. Co., - Okla. -, 166 Pac. 163.