34 Th irtieth A n nual Meeting 



III. The Li'ijislahirc itiaij prohibit persons from catching 

 fish on their own tand in the ctose season. — The iirivate right of 

 fishery on one's own land, where the stream runs through one's 

 land or therefrom, onto the lands of others, is subordinate to the 

 public welfare, and one may be forbidden by law to catch fish on 

 his own land during the close season. Hooker v. Cummings, 20 

 Johns. (X. Y.) 90; Com. v. Chapin, 5 Pick. 199; Vintou 

 V. Welsh, 9 Pick. 87. The right of the riparian proprietor is sub- 

 ject to such regulations as the legislature may make for the com- 

 mon benefit. C*om. v. Bender, 7 Pa. Co. Ct. 624 ; Peters v. State, 

 96 Tenn. 683; People v. Doxtater, 75 Hunn. 472; People v. Col- 

 lison, 85 Mich. 105; People v. Hanaford, 18 Me. 106; People v. 

 Bridges, 142 111. 30; Com. v. Look, 108 Mass. 452. 



IV. The Legislature may prevent the Ohstruction of the 

 Free Passage of Fish. — This is a lawful exercise of police power. 

 Com. V. Essex Co., 13 Gray 274; Holyoke Water Power Co. v. 

 Lyman, 15 Wall. 500. And after a com])any had been granted a 

 charter to l)uild a dam, a subsequent statute requiring it to build 

 a fishway is not unconstitutional, id. 



Every owner of a dam or other obstruction in a stream holds 

 it on condition that a sufficient j)assageway be allowed for fish to 

 pass up and down the stream. Stoughton v. Baker, 4 Mass. 524; 

 Cottrill V. :^lyrick, 12 Me. 229; Parker v. People, 11 111. 581; 

 State V. Slunke, 21 Pac. 675 ; State v. Eoberts, 59 N. H. 256. 



v. The Legislature may J'rotiibit the iSale of Fish and Game 

 or the Shipment of tlie same from the State. — The state legisla- 

 ture, in order to prevent the too rapid destruction of fish and 

 game, have in some of the states, enacted laws, to prohibit the 

 sbi])ment of fish or game from the state. These provisions have 

 been the subject of important adjudication. In Magner v. 

 People, *»: 111.. 320. it was held that, as tlie property of fish and 

 game in the wild state, is in the state, and within the state con- 

 trol, the state legislature may prescribe the terms and conditions 

 on which the ownershi]) may l)e transferred upon capture, to the 

 individual. And the state may as a condition provide that fish 

 or ganu' so cai)tured shall not be shipped out of the state. The 

 State of Connecticut, in 1888, pavssed a law that no person should 

 kill woodcock, quail or rufHed grouse for the purpose of convey- 



