Turning out of posses- sion. 3 Bla. Com. 199. The term is in general use with reference to the removal of an obnoxious person from the conveyance of a common carrier... It must be conceded that the carrier, as an incident to its public employment, not only has the power, but is bound to take all reasonable and proper means to insure the safety and provide for the comfort and con- venience of its passengers, and it follows that it has the right, in the exercise of this au- thority and duty, to repress and prohibit all disorderly conduct in its vehicles, and to ex- pel or exclude therefrom any person whose conduct or condition is such as to render acts of impropriety, rudeness, indecency, or disturbance either inevitable or reason- ably probable; Ray, Pas. Carriers 165. A person who steps upon a car after he has once been put off is a trespasser, re- gardless of his right to be on the car in the first instance; 40 Ill. App. 421. In ejecting a passenger from a car no more force than is necessary should be used; 35 Neb. 74. An action on the case in tort is proper against a carrier for wrongfully ejecting from its train a passenger who has paid his fare, though no force is used; 36 W. Va. 318. As to ejection of passengers for refusal to pay fare, see 12 Lawy. Rep. Ann. 823; PAS- SENGERS; COMMON CARRIERS OF PASSEN- GERS; TICKET. EJECTIONE CUSTODIE (Lat.). A writ of which lay for a guardian to recover the land or person of his ward, or both, where he had been deprived of the posses- sion of them. Fitzh. N. B. 139, L.; Co. Litt. 199. EJECTIONE FIRME (Lat. ejectment from a farm). This writ lay where lands or tenements were let for a term of years, and afterwards the lessor, reversioner, re- mainderman, or a stranger ejected or ousted the lessee of his term. The plaintiff, if he prevailed, recovered the term with damages. Hence Blackstone calls this a mixed action, somewhat between real and personal; for therein are two things re- covered, as well restitution of the "term of years," as damages for the ouster or wrong. This writ is the original foundation of the action of ejectment. 3 Sharsw. Bla. Com. 199; Fitzh. N. B. 220, F, G; Gibson, Eject. 3; Stearn, Real Act. 53, 400. EJECTMENT (Lat. e, out of, jacere, to throw, cast; ejicere, to cast out, to eject). In Practice. A form of action by which possessory titles to corporeal hereditaments may be tried and possession obtained. A form of action which lies to regain the possession of real property, with damages for the unlawful detention. In its origin, during the reign of Edw. III., this action was an action of trespass which lay for a ten- ant for years, to recover damages against a person who had ousted him of his possession without right. To the judgment for damages the courts soon added a judgment for possession, upon which the plaintiff became entitled to a writ of possession. The action of de ejectione firmæ (q. v.), was framed to meet the case of the termor, and just at the close of the middle ages it was held that under it he could re- cover his term. As to its history see 2 Poll. & Maitl. EJЕСTMENT 105. As the disadvantages of real actions as a means of recovering land for the benefit of the real owner from the possession of one who held them without title became a serious obstacle to their use, this form of action was taken advantage of by Ch. J. Rolle to accomplish the same result. In the original action, the plaintiff had been obliged to prove a lease from the person shown to have title, an entry under the lease, and an ouster by some third person. The modified action as sanc- tioned by Rolle was brought by a fictitious person, as lessee against another fictitious person (the casual ejector) alleged to have committed the ouster. Service was made upon the tenant in possession, with a notice annexed from the casual ejector to ap- pear and defend. If the tenant failed to do this, Judgment was given by default and the claimant put In possession. If he did appear, he was allowed to defend only by entering into the consent rule, by which he confessed the fictitious lease, entry, and ouster to have been made, leaving only the title in question. The tenant by a subsequent statute was obliged, under heavy penalties, to give notice to his lessor of the pendency of the action. The action has been superseded in England under the Common Law Procedure Act (1852, $$ 170-220) by a writ, in a prescribed form, addressed, on the claimant's part, to the person or persons in posses- sion, by name, and generally "to all persons entitled to defend the possession" of the premises therein described; commanding such of them as deny the claimant's title to appear in court and defend the possession of the property. Not only the person to whom the writ is directed, but any other person (on filing an affidavit that he or his tenant is in posses- sion, and obtaining the leave of the court or a judge), is allowed to appear and defend. Ejectment has been materially modified in many of the