the chemical fumes discharged from the chimneys of our large towns and from the tall shafts of large manufactories, collieries, and other works, also the strong winds and frosts that are so prevalent in our more mountainous districts, all of which tend more or less to the destruction of trees, shrubs, and vegetation.

In the districts in which the stone walls are so numerous there is always an abundant supply of stone, and material obtainable from the quarries, or from the breaking up of rocks, earthfasts, or boulders on the lands, which can be utilised for the erection of the fences, and also for the drainage of the land by rubble or walled drains.

These walls are generally erected from 4 feet 6 inches to 6 feet in height, and when properly constructed form excellent shelter and protection for cattle, and are of a most permanent character.

I had fences erected forty-five years ago at an elevation of 800 feet above sea level, and they stand to-day as strong and sound as when they were first constructed.

It will no doubt interest Members to have some information as to the cost and mode of construction of these walls. All walls if not on sound ground ought to have rough foundation stones laid about 6 inches below the surface and rather wider than the intended wall, say from 2 feet to 2 feet 6 inches, and from 4 to 6 inches thick.

The wall, commencing about 24 inches thick at bottom, should then be erected, say to a height of about. 3 feet, with good flat bedded stones faced to the outside of the wall, and the inside of the wall made solid with the smaller stones. Then there should be placed upon the wall a through course of stones say from 18 inches to 24

inches wide and the full width of the wall; these being placed about 3 feet apart. Throughs are generally made to project 3 or 4 inches beyond the back face of wall overlooking the adjoining owner's property.

After this the wall must be erected up to the full height, ready to receive the top stones, and at this level should be about 16 inches thick.

The reduction of the wall in thickness from 24 inches to 16 inches allows a batter of 8 inches; this should be 3 inches to the front and 5 inches to the back part of the wall.

Before the top stones are fixed, care should be taken to see that the top of the wall is level and in line.

The topping or finish of the wall is formed by selecting stones and dressing them to about 14 inches wide and 10 inches or 12 inches deep.

Some walls are finished by having the tops irregular in height, some standing about 8 inches higher than others and forming what is called a scotch top.

If a strand of barbed wire is stretched on the top of the higher stones it forms a capital sheep fence.

The finish of the wall, both in appearance and permanence of structure, may be much improved if the top stones are bedded and jointed with lime, and neatly pointed off.

The face side of the wall is formed to the side fronting the land belonging to the person erecting it, and therefore always indicates its ownership.

The cost of stone walls will vary according to the distance of the stone from the fence line, but if the material is within a reasonable distance the price for material and labour for a wall 5 feet high will be about 58. per lineal yard.

RICHARD HORSFALL, Fellow.

SECTION II.

COMMUNICATIONS REFERRING TO PAPERS IN THE "TRANSACTIONS" &c.

On Mr. Clabell Salter's Paper on "The Ownership of the Highway."

(Transactions Vol. XXXIII., pp. 349-371.)

(A.)

In reading this most interesting Paper, I am struck with the extremely limited extent to which the soil of highways is vested in the highway authority, and I think this is a matter which has not been fully understood and appreciated by many surveyors.

In my own experience, as surveyor for a highway authority, cases have arisen in which owners of lands adjoining a public highway have applied for permission to construct a tunnel under it for the purpose of connecting open worked mines on either side, permission in each case being granted on special terms.

From Mr. Clavell Salter's Paper it appears clear that a freeholder has the actual right to construct a tunnel through his own freehold under the road, providing the surface of the roadway is not interfered with.

In a similar way application was made by a colliery proprietor for permission to construct a girder bridge over a highway for the purpose of constructing a

siding to a railway, and it was only after great difficulty, and then on special terms, that this permission was granted.

As a surveyor to a highway authority I have frequently obtained sand and other material suitable for binding purposes from the strips on the sides of the metalled portion of the highways. In a few instances exception has been taken to this by the freeholders of the adjoining land, who claimed that the soil of the highway was vested in them and could not be taken for the purposes of repairing the road. This contention was considered to be sound and no further material was taken.

In a similar manner the highway authority has been in the habit of receiving an acknowledgment for each telephone pole set up along the public highways, but in no case has objection been raised by any of the adjoining freeholders, nor has any claim been made for repayment of the acknowledgments so received.

Several large enclosures have been carried out in past years by my firm, and in each case I find that there was no special direction in the Act as to the vesting of the soil under the highways set out over the common land.

The practice was to allot a certain area of land to the lord of the manor in full compensation of all his manorial rights in the soil and herbage of the lands to be enclosed and his rights of common over the lands. The lord's rights in the soil being thus extinguished, it was considered that the soil under the new highways, when set out, became vested in the commoners to whom the adjoining lands were allotted.

In most cases of enclosures the mines of coal and ironstone are specially reserved to the lord of the

manor, and as other mines would usually consist of only sand and gravel, which could not be conveniently worked without breaking up the highway, the ownership of the soil would be of little value except for the purpose of giving the adjoining owners the right to construct a tunnel under the road or a bridge over it should they at any time find it convenient to do so.

This ownership of the soil of the highway is extremely useful in some cases, as it enables an owner of property to obtain a locus standi to appear before a Parliamentary Committee in cases where promoters of undertakings do not schedule any of his property, but apply for powers to construct works under a highway adjoining it.

I was recently engaged in a case in which a railway company proposed to construct a new railway immediately alongside one of the boundaries of a residential property, in such a position that the new line when constructed would have been close to the house of residence.

It was proposed to continue the line through a tunnel under the highway, which gave access to the owner's property, and as the soil through which this tunnel passed was vested in the owner of the property, he was thereby enabled to obtain a locus standi to petition against the Bill, which he did, satisfactory terms being finally arranged with the company before the petition came to a hearing.

JOHN WILLMOT, Fellow.