COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 41 



SUMMARY OF SUPREME COURT DECISION ON LOBSTER LICENSE LAW. 



It was contended that Sections 1 and 2 of Chapter 437 of the 

 Pubhc Laws of 1909 were unconstitutional, because: 



I. They denied hcenses to ah ens and citizens of the State of less 

 than one years' residence; and, furthermore, ga^ve to the Commis- 

 sioners of Inland Fisheries the arbitrary right to refuse licenses to 

 citizens of the State. By so doing they impaired the right of the 

 people of the State to "enjoy and freely exercise (all) the rights of 

 fishery ... to which they have been hithereto entitled under the 

 charter and usages of the state" as provided in Section 17, Article 

 I, Constitution of Rhode Island; deprived them of "liberty and 

 property" in some other manner than by "judgment of (their) peers 

 or the law of the land" as provided in Section 10, Article I, Constitu- 

 tion of Rhode Island; and was also in conflict with Section 1, Article 

 14 of Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, because 

 citizens of the United States were deprived of rights "without due 

 process of law." 



II. That the above sections of Chapter 437 were further uncon- 

 stitutional in the fact that they interfered with the rights of citizens 

 to employ any assistants they saw fit in the lobster fishery, and also 

 abridged the privileges of citizens of other states and of the United 

 States by preventing them from doing manual labor as servants in 

 connection with the lobster fisheries. In these particulars the sec- 

 tions referred to were in conflict with Section 2, Article 4, Constitu- 

 tion of the United States and Section 1, Article 14 of Amendments 

 to the Constitution of the United States. 



The decision of the supreme court may be briefly summed up in the 

 words of the court, speaking through Chief Justice Dubois. After 

 full consideration of the constitutional questions and numerous 

 citations of authority, he says: 



"We are therefore of the opinion that the constitutional questions 

 aforesaid must be severally answered in the negative. We do not 

 find that any of the requirements of the Constitution of the United 



