able by this preſcription, but ſuch things as are incident, appendant, or appurtenant to lands; for it would be abſurd to claim any thing as the conſequence, or appendix, of an eſtate, with which the thing claimed has no connexion: but, if he preſcribes in himſelf and his anceſtors, he may preſcribe for any thing whatſoever that lies in grant; not only things that are appurtenant, but alſo ſuch as may be in groſs[1]. Therefore a man may preſcribe, that he, and thoſe whoſe eſtate he hath in the manor of Dale, have uſed to hold the advowſon of Dale, as appendant to that manor: but, if the advowſon be a diſtinct inheritance, and not appendant, then he can only preſcribe in his anceſtors. So alſo a man may preſcribe in a que eſtate for a common appurtenant to a manor; but, if he would preſcribe for a common in groſs, he muſt preſcribe in himſelf and his anceſtors. 6. Laſtly, we may obſerve, that eſtates gained by preſcription are not, of courſe, deſcendible to the heirs general, like other purchaſed eſtates, but are an exception to the rule. For, properly ſpeaking, the preſcription is rather to be conſidered as an evidence of a former acquiſition, than as an acquiſition de novo: and therefore, if a man preſcribes for a right of way in himſelf and his anceſtors, it will deſcend only to the blood of that line of anceſtors in whom he ſo preſcribes; the preſcription in this caſe being indeed a ſpecies of deſcent. But, if he preſcribes for it in a que eſtate, it will follow the nature of that eſtate in which the preſcription is laid, and be inheritable in the ſame manner, whether that were acquired by deſcent or purchaſe: for every acceſſory followeth the nature of it's principal.
- ↑ Litt. §. 183. Finch. L. 104.
