BULLETIN OF THE UNITED STATES PISH COMMISSION. 271 



76.-LAWS OF INLAND WATERS. 



By Hon. THEODORE LYMAM. 



[Answer to questions of Monsieur <le Lomeuie.] 



In dealing with the laws of the United States, it is important for a 

 foreigner to remember that the rights of the States individually are 

 sharply distinguished from those of the National Government as defined 

 by the Constitution. 



Within the limitsof the States there is no such thing as a Federal river. 

 Rivers of all sizes belong to the riparian proprietors, opposite proprie- 

 tors owning adfilum aquae. Their proprietorship on navigable rivers is 

 subject to the easement of the passage of vessels. Furthermore, their 

 ownership of the water, like that of the land, is subject to the eminent 

 domain of the State (not of the United States). This ownership of the 

 water carries with it that of the fisheries and such other privileges as 

 may naturally accrue. The State, however, can regulate the time and 

 manner of fishing for the general benefit. 



In Massachusetts the proprietorship of ponds is not like that of rivers. 

 If the pond does not exceed 20 acres in extent, it belongs to the ripa- 

 rian owners ; but if it does exceed 20 acres, theu it belongs tothe State. 

 To this law there are a few exceptions. They are ponds exceeding 20 

 acres in extent which were granted in Colonial times to individuals by 

 royal charter. 



As Massachusetts is one of the oldest States, her laws will illustrate 

 those of many others. In the Sixth Annual Report of. her commissioners 

 of fisheries, sent herewith, in the appendix, will be found her laws on 

 fisheries from the earliest times to 1871. On page 258 will be found a 

 general act, which will give a good idea of the powers of the State. In 

 the Fifth Annual Report, page 29, will be found the arguments and 

 hearing in the case of the Commissioners of Inland Fisheries vs. The 

 Holyoke Water-Power Company ; and in the Eighth Annual Report, 

 page 49, will be found the final decision of this case by the Supreme 

 Judicial Court of the United States, affirming the decision of the Su- 

 preme Court of Massachusetts. This is one of the most interesting cases 

 of its kind ever decided. It involves the rights of river fisheries, of 

 water-power corporations, and of the eminent domain of the State over 

 both. 



The tlolyoke Company got a charter from the State authorizing the 

 construction of a dam across the Connecticut River to create water- 

 power for manufacturing. This dam was so high that it would stop 

 the passage of shad (Alosa sapidissima) and other fishes. The State im- 

 posed the condition that the company should pay for the fisheries thus 

 destroyed above the dam. It did pay for them and erected the dam. 



