[406]. D. 9. 2. 13. pr.
[407]. Droit Naturel, II. sect. 55.
[408]. Principles, p. 231; Works, I. 108. So Puchta, sect. 231: Nur an ... körperlichen Gegenständen ist Eigenthum möglich.
[409]. Supra, § 87.
[410]. The full power of alienation and disposition is an almost invariable element in the right of ownership, but cannot be regarded as essential, or included in the definition of it. A married woman subject to a restraint on anticipation is none the less the owner of her property, though she cannot alienate or encumber it.
Austin (II. p. 790) defines the right of ownership as a “right indefinite in point of user, unrestricted in point of disposition, and unlimited in point of duration, over a determinate thing.”
[411]. Co. Litt. 4 a.
[412]. On this question see Pollock’s Torts, p. 347, 8th ed.; Clerk & Lindsell’s Torts, pp. 337–339, 4th ed.; Salmond’s Torts, § 53 (9); Hazeltine’s Law of the Air; Pickering v. Rudd, 4 Camp. 219; 16 R. R. 777; Fay v. Prentice, 1 C. B. 828; Wandsworth Board of Works v. United Telegraph Coy., 13 Q. B. D. 904; Ellis v. Loftus Iron Coy., L. R. 10 C. P. 10.
[413]. Art. 905.
[414]. Inst. Just. 2. 1. 29. See also Gaius 2. 73: Superficies solo cedit.