Landforpasturealsooccursinprivatehandsandinseveralty，butsuchcasesaremuchrarer。(3*)Sometimesthepasturegetsseparatedandputunder’defence’foronepartoftheyear，andmergesintocommunalownershipafterwards。(4*)Butinthevastmajorityofcasesthepastureisusedincommon，andnoneofthetenantshasarighttofenceitinortoappropriateitforhisownexclusivebenefit。Itoughttobenoted，thattherighttosendone’scattletothepastureonthewaste，themoors，orinthewoodsofamanorappearsregularlyandintimatelyconnectedwiththerighttodepastureone’scattleontheopenfieldsofthevillage。(5*)Bothformonlydifferentmodesofusingcommunalsoil。Asinthecaseofarableandmeadowtheundividedusecannotbemaintainedandgetsreplacedbyasystemofequalisedsharesorholdings，sointhecaseofpasturethefacultyofsendingoutanynumberofbeastsretiresbeforetheequalisationofsharesaccordingtocertainmodesof’stinting’thecommon。Wefindasanimportantmanorialarrangementthecustomto’apportion’therightsofcommontothetenements，thatistodecideinthemanorialCourt，mostlyaccordingtoverdictsofjuries，howmanyheadofcattle，andofwhatparticularkind，maybesenttothediverspasture-groundsofthevillagebytheseveralholdings。Fromtimetotimetheseregulationsarerevised。OneoftheGlastonburySurveyscontains，forinstance，thefollowingdescriptionfromthe45thyearofHenryIII。Eachhidemaysendtothecommoneighteenoxen，sixteencows，onebull，theoffspringofthecowsoftwoyears，twohundredsheepwithfourrams，aswellastheiroffspringofoneyear，fourhorsesandtheiroffspringofoneyear，twentyswineandtheiroffspringofoneyear。(6*)Accordingtoacommonruletheonlycattleallowedtousethevillagepasturewasthatwhichwasconstantlykeptinthevillage，levantecouchantenlemaner。Inordertoguardagainstthefraudulentpracticeofbringingoverstrangecattleandthusmakingmoneyattheexpenseofthetownship，itwasrequiredsometimesthatthecommonablecattleshouldhavewinteredinthemanor。(7*)
Theselastrulesseematfirstsightdifficultofexplanation：onedoesnotseeinwhatwaythebringinginofstrangecattlecoulddamagethepeasantryofthevillage，asnobodycoulddrivemorethanacertainnumberofbeaststothecommon，andastheoverburdeningofitdependedentirelyontheexcessofthisnumber，andnotontheoriginofthebeasts。Andsoonehastolooktosomethingelsebesidestheapprehensionthatthecommonwouldgetoverburdened，inordertofindasuitableexplanationoftherule。Anexplanationisreadilysuppliedbythenotionthattheuseofthecommonwascloselyconnectedwiththeholding。Strangecattlehadnothingtodowiththeholding，andweretobekeptofffromthelandofthecommunity。itisasrepresentativesofacommunitywhoseterritoryhasbeeninvadedthattheindividualcommonershavecausetocomplain。Infact，thecommonpasture，aswellasthemeadows，werethoughtofmerelyasaportionoftheholding。Thearrangementsdidnotadmitofthesamecertaintyorratherofthesamekindofdeterminationasthedivisionofthearable，butthemainideawhichregulatedthelatterwasbynomeanscutshortinitsoperation，ifonemaysayso：itwasnotboundupwiththeexactmeasurementofarableacres。Theholdingwasthenecessaryagriculturaloutfitofapeasantfamily，andofthisoutfitthemeansoffeedingthecattlewerequiteasimportantapartasthemeansofraisingcrops。Itisonlyinaccuratelythatwehavebeenspeakingofavirgateof30acres，andofaploughlandof180or160。Thetrueexpressionwouldbetospeakofavirgateof30
acresofarableandthecorrespondingrightstopastureandothercommonuses。Andtherecords，whentheywanttogivesomethinglikeafulldescription，donotomittomentionthe’pertinencia，’thenecessaryadjunctsofthearable。Thetermisratheravagueone，quiteinkeepingwiththerightswhich，thoughtangibleenough，cannotbecuttosocertainapatternasinthecaseofarable。(8*)Andforthisreasonthelaxerrighthadtoconformtothestricterone，andcametobeconsideredasappendanttoit。
Wehaveconsideredtillnowthedifferentaspectsassumedbycommonofpasture，whenitariseswithinthemanor，andasaconsequenceofthearrangementofitsholdings。Butthisisnottheonlywayinwhichcommonofpasturemayarise。Itmayoriginateinanexpressandspecialgrantbythelordeithertoatenantortoastranger。(9*)itmayalsoproceedfromcontinuoususefromtimebeyondlegalmemory。(10*)itmusthavebeendifficultinmanycasestopreventstrangersfromestablishingsuchaclaimbyreasonoflongoccupationinsomepartofawidelystretchingmoororwoodpasture。(11*)Itwasnotlessdifficultinsuchcasestodrawexactboundariesbetweenadjoiningcommunities，andwefindthatlargetractsofcountryareusedasacommonpasture-groundbytwovillages，andevenbymore。(12*)Neighboursdeemitoftenadvantageoustoestablishacertainreciprocityinthisrespect。(13*)Byspecialagreementorbytacitallowancelordsandtenantsintercommononeachother’slands：thispracticeextendsmostlytothewasteonly，butinsomecasesthearableandmeadowareincludedaftertheremovalofthecropandofthehay。Theprocedureofthewrit’quojure’
waspartlydirectedtoregulatetheserightsandtopreventpeoplefromencroachingwantonlyupontheirneighbours。(14*)Whenlandheldinonefeeoronemanorwasbrokenupforsomereasonintosmallerunits，therightsofpasturewerecommonlykeptupaccordingtotheoldarrangements。(15*)
Thesedifferentmodesoftreatingthepasturepresentratheranincongruousmedley，andmaybeclassifiedinseveralwaysanddeducedfromdiverssources。
Thechiefdistinctionsofmodernlawarewellknown：’CommonAppendantistherightwhicheveryfreeholdtenantofthemanorpossesses，todepasturehiscommonablecattle，levantandcouchantonhisfreeholdtenementancientlyarable，onthewastesofthemanor，andoriginallyonall(common)pastureinthemanor。Commonappurtenantontheotherhandisagainstcommonright，becomingappurtenanttolandeitherbylonguserorbygrantexpressorimplied。Thusitcoversarighttocommonwithanimalsthatarenotcommonable，suchaspigs，donkeys，goats，andgeese；orarighttocommonclaimedforlandnotancientlyarable，suchaspasture，orlandreclaimedfromthewastewithinthetimeoflegalmemory，orforlandthatisnotfreehold，butcopyhold。’(16*)Commoningrossisapersonalrighttocommonpastureinoppositiontothepraedialrights。MrScruttonhasshownfromtheYearBooksthatthesetermsanddistinctionsemergegraduallyduringthefourteenthcentury，andappearsubstantiallysettledonlyinLittleton’streatise。Bractonandhisfollowers，FletaandBritton，donotknowthem。Theseareimportantfacts，buttheyhardlywarranttheinferenceswhichhavebeendrawnfromthem。Thesubjecthasbeenindisputeinconnexionwithdiscussionsastothefreevillagecommunity。
JoshuaWilliams，inhisRightsofCommon，(17*)hadassumedcommonappendanttooriginateinancientcustomaryrightbestowedbythevillagecommunityandnotbythelord’sgrant；Scruttonarguesthatsucharightisnotrecognisedbythedocuments。Helaysstressonthefact，thatBractonspeaksonlyoftwomodesofacquiringcommon，namely，expressgrantbythelord，andlongusageunderstoodasconstantsufferanceonthepartofthelordamountingtoanexpressgrant。ButthisisonlyanotherwayofsayingthatBracton’sexpositionisbasedonfeudalnotions，thathislandlawisconstructedontheprinciple’nulleterresansseigneur，’andthateverytenement，aswellaseveryrighttocommon，isconsideredintheoryasgrantedbythelordofthemanor。ItmaybeadmittedthatBractondoesnotrecognisejustthatkindoftitlewhichlaterlawyersknewasappendancy，doesnotrecognisethatamancanclaimcommonbyshowingmerelythatheisafreeholderofthemanor。Unlesshereliesonlongcontinueduser，hemustrelyupongrantorfeoffment。Butthedistinctionbetweensaying’IclaimcommonbecauseIamafreeholderofthemanor’andsaying’IclaimcommonbecauseIormyancestorshavebeenenfeoffedofafreeholdtenementofthemanorandtherightofcommonpassedbythefeoffment，’thoughitmaybeofjuristicinterestandevenofsomepracticalimportanceasregulatingtheburdenofproofandgivingrisetocanonsfortheinterpretationofdeeds，isstillasuperficialdistinctionwhichdoesnotpenetratedeeplyintothesubstanceofthelaw。OnthewholewefindthatthefreeholderofBracton’stimeandofearliertimesdoesnormallyenjoytheserightswhichinaftertimeweredescribedas’appendant’tohisfreehold；anditiswellworthwhiletoaskwhetherbehindthegeneralassumptionsoffeudaltheorytheredonotliecertaindatawhich，ontheonehand，prepareandexplainlaterterminology，andareconnected，ontheother，withthehistoricalantecedentsofthefeudalsystem。
Alittlereflectionwillshowthatthedivisionsoflaterlawdidnotspringintobeingmerelyasresultsoflegalreasoningandcasuistry。indeed，fromalawyer’spointofview，nothingcanbemoreimperfectthanaclassificationwhichstartsfromthreeorfourprinciplesofdivisionseeminglynotconnectedwitheachother。Commonappendantbelongstoaplaceancientlyarable，commonappurtenantmaybelongtolandofanykind；thefirstisdesignedforcertainbeasts，thesecondforcertainothers；oneisboundupwithfreehold，theothermaygowithcopyhold；inonecasetherightproceedsfromcommonlaw，intheotherfrom’specialty。’Onemayreasonablyaskwhyapersonsendingacowtotheopenfieldsortothewastefromafreeholdtenementcanclaimcommonappendant，andhisneighboursendingacowtothesamefieldsfromacopyholdhasonlycommonappurtenant。Oragain，whydoesaplotofarablereclaimedfromthewasteconfercommonappurtenant，andancientarablecommonappendant？Oragain，whyarethegoatsortheswineofatenementsenttopasturebyvirtueofcommonappurtenant，andthecowsandhorsesbyvirtueofcommonappendant？And，aboveall，whathavetheseveralrestrictionsanddefinitionstodowitheachother？Suchaseriesofcontrastedattributesdefiesanyattempttosimplifytherulesofthecaseaccordingtoanyclearlydefinedprinciple：
itseemsastrangegrowthinwhichoriginalandlaterelements，importantandsecondaryfeatures，arecapriciouslybroughttogether。
Inordertoexplainthesephenomenawehavetolooktoearlierandnottolaterlaw。Whatseemsarbitraryanddiscordantinmoderntimes，appearsclearandconsistentintheoriginalstructureofthemanor。
Theolderdivisionsmaynotbesodefinitelydrawnandsodevelopedasthelater，buttheyhavetheadvantageofbeingbasedonfundamentaldifferencesoffact。Evenwhenthenamesandtermsdonotappearwellsettled，thesubject-matterarrangesitselfaccordingtosomenaturalcontrasts，anditisperhapsbytooexclusivestudyofnamesandtermsthatMr。Scruttonhasbeenpreventedfromdulyappreciatingthedifferenceinsubstance。Hesaysoftheendofthethirteenthcentury：’Inthereportsaboutthistimeitseemsgenerallytobe。assumedthatifthecommonercannotshowanespecialteorspecialgrantortitle，hemustshow“fraunctenementenlavilleaquescommuneestappendant。”Thuswehavethequestion：——“Comentclamezvouscommune？Comappendant，ouparespecialte，’whileHengham，J。says：
’prescriptiondeterreestassezbonespecialte“’(p。50)。Thisisreallytheessenceofalltherulesregardingcommonofpasture，and，whatismore，thecontrastfollowsdirectlyfromarrangementswhichdidnotcomeintouseinthefourteenthcentury，butwereinfullworkatthetimeofBractonandlongbeforeit。Whatiscalledinlaterlawcommonappendant，appearsasthenormaladjuncttotheholding，thatis，toashareinthesystemofvillagehusbandry。Ifabovateisgrantedtoaperson，somuchoftherightsofpastureasbelongstoeverybovateinthevillageispresumedtobegrantedwiththearable。’Somuchasbelongstoeverybovateinthevillage；’thismeans，thatthecommondependsinthiscaseonageneralarrangementofthepastureinthevillage。Suchanarrangementexistsineveryplace；itisregulatedbycustomandbythedecisionsofthemanorialcourtorhalimote，itextendsequallyoverthefreeandovertheunfreeland，overthewaste，themoorandwood，andoverthefallow。Itadmitsacertainnumberandcertainkindsofbeasts，andexcludesothers。Onlybecausesuchageneralarrangementissupposedtoexist，istherighttocommontreatedinsovagueamanner；thedocumentspresent，intruth，onlyareferencetorelationswhicharesubstantiatedinthehusbandrysystemofthemanor。Buttherightofcommonmayexceedtheselinesinmanyways：itmaybejoinedtoatenementwhichliesoutsidethemanorialsystem，oraplotfreshlyreclaimedfromthewaste，ortoaholdingbelongingtosomeothermanor。Itmayadmitagreaternumberandotherkindsofbeaststhanthosewhichwereheldcommonableintheusualcourseofmanorialhusbandry。
Insuchcasestherighttopasturehadtoproceedfromsomespecialagreementorgrant，and，ofcourse，hadtobebasedonsomethingdifferentfromtheordinaryreferencetotheexistingsystemofcommonhusbandry。Iftherewasnodeedtogoby，sucharightcouldonlybeestablishedbylonguse。
