case finch versus RESBRIDGER Nov after a long enjoyment of a watercourse run  to a house and garden through the ground of another it shall be presume the  owner of the house have a right to the watercourse unless the other party can  show a special licence or a agreement to restrain it in point of time a long  quiet enjoyment be the best evidence of a right the bill be to quiet the  plaintiff in the enjoyment of a watercourse to his house and garden through  the ground of the defendant it appear upon the proof that Vernon chancery case  er p there have be a long enjoyment of this watercourse particular by the earl  of Arundel and after he by the duke of Norfolk and that the plaintiff have  scour and repair it when there be occasion and that the duke be in the quiet  enjoyment of it when he sell it to the plaintiff for the defendant it be  insist that the earl of Arundel in take a long lease of the land now the  defendant and that while he hold those land as lessee he make the watercourse  in question and that after the expiration of the lease he be many time deny  liberty to scour or amend Vernon chancery case the watercourse and several  witness depose to that effect and the defendant insist it be only upon  sufferance and not find upon any agreement or consideration this cause be  first hear before the Lord chancellor summer he direct a issue to be try at  law whether there be any agreement make between any of the owner of the  plaintiff and defendant estate respective for the make or continue of the  watercourse in question upon a rehear before the Lord keeper wright be decree  for the plaintiff declare a quiet enjoyment be the best evidence of right and  will presume a agreement and the proof ought to come on the other side to show  the special licence or that it be to be restrain or limit in point of time the  decree be so but no reason state Reg lib a fol and affirm by Lord keeper on  another rehear that July follow Reg lib a fol so possession for sixty year of  a watercourse will sustain a bill against a mortgagee who foreclose the equity  of redemption to be quiet in possession although right not establish at law  bush v western pre Ch so bill for specific performance of covenant for liberty  for plaintiff to dig in a pit dismiss defendant have be in possession sixty  year Scholefield v Whitehead ante so after fifty year quiet possession prove  by affidavit equity will not interpose in a question right of common until  after one or more verdict at law anon pale yellow Eq Rep so where defendant  plead forty year possession without account or admission of any debt to a bill  set up a old mortgage and state a account settle and that owe to infancy  coverture and other disability plaintiff can not proceed the plea be allow  blewitt v Thomas Ves jun cook v arnham p wms and case in note wonder query  however if the bill have set forth who be the infant and at what time the  disability take place so the court will presume livery and decree surrender  and release from long possession Lyford v coward ante Vol and case cite there  so after twenty year possession purchaser shall not be put to prove payment of  his bind for the purchase money anon mose and as a general principle court  both of law and equity will strong presume in favour of length of possession  the principal case ub sup cook v cook atk but in the case of long possession  by beneficiary and trust under a term to raise a sum of money the court will  not presume any other title Acherley v roe Ves