American Fisheries Society. 41 



and better on appeal to the circuit court than in the petty courts 

 where original jurisdiction may be vested. 



8. Where the state expends large sums in stocking streams 

 the right of the public to fish in them should, as far as possible, 

 be secured. The right to share in the benefit of state stocking 

 should not be monopolized by riparian owners. This subject is 

 a delicate one to handle, especially where the old rule obtains 

 that the riparian ow]ier has the exclusive right of taking fish on 

 his own soil. It will be held generally that he cannot be divested 

 of this right by arbitrary legislation. From those who will not 

 accord to the public this right, as to streams not wholly within 

 their own soil, stocking should be withheld, as far as practicable. 

 In Wisconsin, the law once provided that the applicants for 

 stocking must dedicate their waters stocked by the state, to free 

 fishing; but this law was found impracticable of execution and 

 was modified. Here is need of careful legislation. 



9. The state laws regulating the free passage of fish are 

 usually utterly disregarded, or are dead letters because of their 

 inadequacy. They need a thorough overhauling and more 

 vigorous enforcement. The right of the public and of riparian 

 owners to have passage ways for fish up and down the stream is a 

 common law right and a valuable one. Yet, no right has been 

 more systematically and flagrantly disregarded. This right ex- 

 tends to navigable as well as non-navigable streams. Eemley v. 

 Meeks, 51 L. R. A. 414. 



The dam owners should be required to put in adequate fish- 

 ways; and the game wardens charged with the duty of keeping 

 them to the obedience of the law. 



10. All statutes providing forfeiture, ought to prescribe and 

 declare sufiicient suitable forms for the guidance of wardens 

 and officers in making complaints and magistrates in issuing 

 warrants, rendered judgment and issuing other process. This 

 avoids likelihood of mistakes that vitiate the proceedings. 



DISCUSSION OF GENERAL BRYAXT's PAPER. 



Mr. John W. Titcoml^, St. Johnsbury, Yt. : It is a splendid 

 paper. Every one who has to do with the administration of the 

 laws as well as the work of propagation of fish, will appreciate 

 the imjiortance and value of having the difi^erent laws on the sul)- 



