Ithinkthatallthismustfollownecessarilyassoonasthemainfactisadmitted，thatcommonisnormallytherighttopastureofashareholderofthemanor。Theobjectionmayberaised，thatsuchapriorireasoningisnotsufficientinthecase，becausethedocumentsdonotcountenanceitbytheirclassification。Wouldtheobjectionbefair？Hardly，ifonedoesnotinsistonfindinginBractontheidenticaltermsusedinCokeuponLittleton。ItistruethatBractonspeaksofcommoningeneral，andnotofcommonappendant，appurtenant，andingross，buttherightofcommonwhichhetreatsasnormalappearstobeverypeculiaronacloserexaminationofhisrules。Itispraedialandnotpersonal；tobeginwith，itisalwaysthoughtofasbelongingtoatenement。18*Whatismore，itcannotbelongtoatenementreclaimedfromthewaste，19*andinthiswaytherequirementof’ancientarable’isestablished，thatis，thepastureisconsideredasoneoftherightsconcededtotheoriginalsharesofamanorialcommunity。Theuseoftheopenfieldoutsidethetimeofreasonabledefence20*isprimarilymeant，andthecommonpastureappearsfromthispointofviewasoneofthestagesintheprocessofcommonfarming。Tomakeupthewhole，therighttocommonisdefinedbya’quantumpertinet。’21*whichhasasenseonlyinconnexionwiththeadmeasurementofclaimseffectedbytheinternalorganisationofthemanor。SuchisevidentlythenormalarrangementpresupposedbyBracton’sdescription，andhisonlyfaultis，thathedoesnotdistinguishwithclearnessbetweentheconsequencesofthenormalarrangement，andofgrantsorusurpationswhichsupplementandmodifyit。Itmustberememberedthatheonlygivesthesubstantivelawaboutcommonrightsinthecourseofadiscussionofthepleadingsinactions’quojure’andassizesofpasture。IfwecomparewithBracton’stexttherulesanddecisionslaiddowninthelegalpracticeofthethirteenthcentury，weshallfindthatthesamefactsareimpliedbythem。Theyallsupposeacontrastbetween’intrinsec’and’forinsec’claimstocommon，thatisbetweentherightsofthosewhoaremembersofthemanorialgroup，andtherights，ifany，ofthosewhoareoutsideit，andagainacontrastbetweenthenormalrightsofcommonersandanymoreextensiverightsacquiredbyspecialgrantoragreement。Onlythefreeholdersareprotectedintheenjoymentoftheircommons；onlythefreeholdersareprotectedintheenjoymentoftheirtenements；buttheirclaimsarebasedonarrangementsinwhichtheunfreelandparticipatesineverythingwiththefree。Itmaybeaddedthatlitigationmostlyarisesfromtheadjustmentof’forinsec’claimsunderthewrit’Quojure。’
Theintercommoningbetweenneighboursgivesrisetoagoodmanydisputes，andismuchtoofrequenttobeconsidered，asitwasbylaterlaw，amere’excusefortrespassing。’22*Thiscommon’purcausedevicinage’maybearelicofatimewhenadjoiningvillagesformedapartofahigherunitofsomekind，oftheMark，ofahundred，forexample。Itmaybeexplainedalsobythedifficultyofsettingdefiniteboundariesinwidetractsofmoorandforest。Howeverthismaybe，itsconstantoccurrenceformsanothergermofanecessarycontrastbetweenthetwoclasseswhichafterwardsdevelopedintocommonappendantandcommonappurtenant。Itcouldnotbebroughtunderthesamerulesasthosewhichflowedfromtheinternalarrangementofthemanor。A
specialdifficultyattendeditastoadmeasurement：thecustomarytreatmentofotherholdingscouldnotinthiscaseserveasastandard。Theverylaxityoftheprinciplenaturallygaveoccasiontoverydifferentinterpretationsanddeductions。Andsowearejustifiedinsaying，thatthechiefdistinctionsoflaterlawaretobefoundintheirsubstanceinthethirteenthcentury，andthatalthoughagooddealofconfusionoccursindetails，theearlierdocumentsgiveevenbettercluesthanthelatertothereasonswhichledtothewell-knownclassification。
Commonappendant，ifwemayusethemoderntermforthesakeofbrevity，isindissolublyconnectedwiththesystemofhusbandryfollowedbythevillagecommunity。Averynoticeablefeatureofitis，that，inonesense，ittowersoverthelordofthemanoraswellasoverthetenants。Ofcourse，legallythelordisconsideredastheownerofthewaste，23*butevenfromthepointofviewofpurelawhisownershipisrestrictedbyhisowngrants。insomuchashehasconcededfreeholdtenementstocertainpersons，heisboundbyhisowndeednottowithholdfromthesepersonsthenecessaryadjunctsofsuchtenements，andespeciallytherightsofpastureboundupwiththem。Thefreetenantssharewiththelord，ifhewantstoturnhiscommonpasturetosomespecialandlucrativeuse；if，forinstance，strangersareadmittedtoitformoney，onepartoftheproceedsgoestothetenantry。24*Again，thelordmaynotoverburdenthecommon，andsometimesfreeholderstrytheirhandatlitigationagainstthelordonthegroundthathesendshiscattletosomeplacewheretheyoughtnottogo。25*Thepointcannotbeoverlooked，thatthelordofthemanorappearssubjectedtocertainrulessetupbycustomandcommondecisioninthemeetingsofhistenantry。Thenumberandkindofbeastswhichmaycometothecommonfromhislandisfixed，aswellasthenumberthatmaycomefromthelandofacottager。26*Thefreeholdersalonecanenforcetheruleagainsthim，butitissetupnotbythefreeholders，butbytheentirecommunityofthemanor，andpracticallybytheserfsmorethanbythefreeholders，becausetheyaresomuchmorenumerous。
Asthecommonofpastureappearsasanoutcomeofasystemofhusbandrysetupbythevillagecommunity，soeverychangeintheuseofthepastureoughtinthenaturalcoursetoproceedfromadecisionofthiscommunity。Suchachangemaybeeffectedinoneoftwomanners：thecustomaryrotationofcropsmaybealtered，orelseapartofthewastemaybereclaimedfortillage。Inthefirstcase，aportionoftheopenarableandmeadow，whichoughttohavebeencommonableatacertaintime，ceasestobeso；inthesecond，therighttosendcattletothewasteisstintedinsomuchasthearableisputunderdefence，orthelandisusedfortheconstructionofdwellings。Bythecommonlawthefreetenantsalonecouldobtainaremedyforanytransgressioninthisrespect。Ihavementionedalreadythatsuitsfrequentlyarosewhentheold-fashionedrotationofcropswasmodifiedinaccordancewiththeprogressofcultivation。Astotherightofapprovingfromthewaste，therelativepositionoflordandtenantswasforalongtimedebateable，and，aseverybodyknows，thelordwasempoweredtoapprovebytheStatuteofMertonof20