IV.  How  Lost  or  Eztrngoiihed.  —  An  easement  may  be  lost  or
extinguished  by  a  release  from  the  owner  of  the  dominant  tene-
ment ;  ^  by  a  merger  of  the  two  estates  under  the  same  title  and

See  also  Coolidge   v.  Learned,  8    Pick.  W.  &  A.  R.  Co,  67  Ga.  76a    See  also

(Mass.)  504;  Hazard  v.  Robinson,  3  Mass.  Powell  v.  Bagg,  8  Grav  (Mass.),  441 ;  Le-

272  ;  Melvin  v.  Whiting,  13  Pick.  (Mass.)  high  Valley  kT  Co.  v.  McFarlan,  30  N.  J.
184;  Barnes  v.  Haynes,  13  Gray  (Mass.),  £q.  180;    Eckerson  v.  Crippen,  39  Hun

18S;  Kent  V.  Waite,  10  Pick.  (Mass.)  138;  (N.  Y,),  419.
Pollard  V,  Barnes,  2  Cush.  (Mass.)  191 ;        A  right  of  way  over  a  person's  land  in

».).582;
Hill  V,  Crosby,  2  Pick.  (Mass.)  466;  Com.    dominant  owner,  and  least  prejudicial  to


Stearns  z/.  Jones,  12  Allen  (Mass. ),^82;    all  directions,  where  most  convenient  to  the


V*  Low,  3  Pick.  (Mass.)  408;   Sargent  v,  the  servient  owner,  cannot  be  prescribed

Ballard,  9  Pick.  (Mass.)  2qi ;  Gloucester  v.  for,  nor  can  a  non-existing  srant  of  such  a

Beach,  2  Pick.  ( Mass.)  60 ;  Medf  ord  v,  Pratt,  way  be  presumed.    Jones  v,  JPercival,  5  Pick.
4  Pick.  (Mass.)  222  ;  Gayetty  v,  Bethune,  14  (Mass.)  485.
Mass.  49;  Bodfish  v.  Bodfish,  105  Mass.  317 ;  Title  by  prescription  is  restricted  to  such

Gordon  z'.  Taunton,  126  Mass.  34^;  Wallace  rights  as  might  have  been  created  by  grant.
