Page:Blackwood's Magazine volume 150.djvu/280

payers upon needless law costs. The mere fact that a strong and responsible body is in charge of these rights will bring effective moral pressure to bear upon proprietors inclined to tamper with a public path. On the other hand, if there is a substantial question of law to be decided, it will be of the greatest advantage to the landowner to have a responsible opponent instead of the casual man of straw whom he may now be compelled to fight. Two bills embodying this principle are now before the House of Commons, the one introduced by Sir Charles Dalrymple, the other by Mr Buchanan. Into their details it is needless to enter. Either would be a valuable measure. Either would tend to secure the public in the enjoyment of rights which already belong to it. It is true that these bills might in some cases lead to contests, but contests cannot always be avoided. Where contests arise they will be pitched battles on a clear issue and leading to large results. They will define for all time the general rights of the public to the use of a particular path. Contests under Mr Bryce's bill would lead to nothing. They would be fruitless fights of guerilla warfare, for they could settle nothing except the intentions of a particular person on a particular day. Any pedestrian would be liable to find himself at any moment embarked in a quarrel. Any landlord might find himself called on to vindicate the discretion of his keeper in a law court. Hence the bill would cause an amount of irritation entirely disproportionate to any advantage to be derived from it. At present tact and good feeling, on the whole, prevail through Scotland. Long may it be before Mr Bryce, by carrying his resolution, has the chance of setting the heather on fire.