Easement

A right in the owner of one parcel of land, by reason of such ownership, P> use the laud of another for a special purpose ii"t Inconsistent with a general property in the owner.

2 Washb. R. P. 25; Clark v. Glidden, GO Yt. 702, ir, Atl. 358.

A privilege which the owner of one adjacent tenement hath of another, existing in respect of their several tenements, by which that owner against whose tenement the privilege exists is obliged to suffer or not to do something on or in regard to his own land for the advantage of him in whose land the privilege exists.

Termes de la Leu, Easements; Downing v. Baldwin, 1 S. & B. (Pa.) 298; 3 B. & C. 339; Lawton v. Rivers. 2 M'Cord (S. C.) 451. 1.", Am. Dec. 741; Com. v. Low, 3 Pick. (Mass.) ^<»S; Forbes v. Bal enseifer, 74 111. 183; Oliver v. Hook, 17 Md. 301; Strong v. Wales. 50 Yt. 361; Howell v. Estes, 71 Tex. GOO, 12 S. W. 62; Koenigs v. Jung. 73 Wis. 178, 40 N. W. 801.

Although the terms are sometimes used as if convertible, properly speaking easement refers to the right enjoyed by one and servitude the burden imposed upon the other. An interest in land created by grant or agreement, express or implied, which confers a right upon the owner thereof to some profit, benefit, dominion, or lawful use out of or over the estate of another.

Huyck v. Andrews, 113 N. Y. SI, 20 N. E. 581, 3 L. R. A. 7S9, 10 Am. St. Rep. 432.

In the civil law, the land against which the privilege exists is called the servient tenement: its proprietor, the servient owner; he in whose favor it exists, the dominant owner; his land, the dominant tenement. And, as these rights are not personal and do not change with the persons who may own the respective estates, it is very common to personify the estates as themselves owning or enjoying the easements; Wolfe v. Frost, 4 Sandf. Ch. (X. Y.) 72; Hills v. Miller, 3 Paige, Ch. (N. Y.) 254, 24 Am. Dec. 21S: Boston Water Power Co. v. R. Co., 16 Pick. (Mass.) 522. There are said to be in England five different classes of rights which one man may have over the land of another: Easements, profits;1 prendre, personal licenses, customary rights, and natural rights.

Odgers C. L. 5G1.

This classification is apparently observed in the English cases. Of these subdivisions, profits;1 prendre and licenses are treated under these titles. "Customary rights" are referred to below. They are more common in England than here. "Natural rights" do not depend upon grant or support to land by adjacent land, the right to the flow of water, and the right to air free from noxious smells. These rights, of course, exist without grant. See Lateral Support; Riparian Proprietors; Nuisance. These distinctions have not always been fully observed in the cases here. The distinction between an ordinary easement and an easement in gross is tbat in the former there is and in the latter there is not a dominant tenement; Jones, Easements 25. Lord Cairns, L. J., said in Rangeley v. Midland R. Co., L. R. 3 Ch. 311, that there is no such thing in the civil law or in England as an easement in gross — an easement not connected with a dominant tenement. Mr. Jones (Easements 25) states that he uses the term "easement in gross" because it is in general use here by legal writers, judges and the profession, and it is useless to attempt to establish a refinement of definition intended to do away with it. On the other hand, Sharswood, C. J., said: "That there may be the grant of an easement in gross personal to the grantee is not to be denied."

Tinicum Fishing Co. v. Carter, 61 Pa. 21, 38, 100 Am. Dec. 597.

To the same effect are 3 Kent 420; Washb. Easem. 8; Fisher v. Fair, 34 S. C. 203, 13 S. E. 470, 14