the court found plaintiff had improved manure piling heaps. but principle not apply droppings of animals driven travelers on highway. highway not used, , cannot used, purpose of agriculture. manure of no benefit whatsoever it, on contrary detriment; , in cities , large villages becomes nuisance, , removed public officers @ public expense. finding in case is, “that removal of manure , scrapings calculated improve appearance , health of borough.” therefore evident cases relied upon defendant have no application case. but said if manure personal property, possession of owner of fee, , scraping heaps plaintiff did not change possession, continued before, , therefore plaintiff cannot recover, neither had possession nor right immediate possession. the manure belonged travelers animals dropped it, in being worthless them abandoned; , whether became property of borough of stamford owned fee of land on manure lay, unnecessary determine; if did, case finds removal of filth improvement borough, ,