—denying defendant's claim that he had customary right to collect seaweed from plaintiff's property and characterizing it as profit

In the 19th century the New Hampshire courts adopted the doctrine as it had been applied under English law.

In American jurisdictions that permitted customary claims, it was nevertheless commonplace that custom would not support "usufruct."

Until very recently, American acceptance of custom to protect public beach rights was confined to a few early New Hampshire cases

—finding that Hobbes did not have a customary right or easement to collect seaweed from Nudd's property above the hide-tide mark because Hobbs only had a profit. However, the court recognized the possibility of an easement through custom

Nonetheless, some courts in the early nineteenth century in Maine, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire did make reference to the Blackstonian doctrine of custom-even though they concluded that the doctrine did not apply

" 'See supra note 39; see also supra text accompanying notes 3539. i "'New Hampshire was the chief state to recognize customary claims.

—defendants alleged that they only had a privilege to deposit seaweed collected elsewhere on plaintiff' s property and carry it away later.

In New Hampshire, a right in the shore has been recognized to belong to the owner of the adjoining upland, either by reason of its having once been under the jurisdiction of Massachusetts, or by early and continued usage.

[CITATION] Journal of Land Use & Environmental Law

[CITATION] Woman in Engineering: A Bibliography on Their Progress and Prospects

[PDF] Recent Important Decisions

[BOOK] The Law of Usages and Customs, with Illustrative Cases