SALMON-FISHERY OF SCOTLAND. 87 



or only rivers ? This was a sad point, which it took fourteen 

 long years to determine. Both the Judges and the Counsel, 

 no doubt, did their best, in the way in which they handle all 

 the cases which come before them. The Judges quoted old 

 songs, and the counsel cited the classics Ovid, Virgil, and 

 Horace to show the intentions of those ancient worthies, the 

 Scotch Legislators, in framing their fishing Statutes, until at 

 length, by their united efforts, they made nonsense of the 

 Statutes, and then most unjustly laid the blame not upon 

 themselves, and their absurd constructions, but upon the 

 defunct legislators. 



If the Court had only read these statutes like other Acts of 

 Parliament, and as we conceive all Acts of the Legislature in- 

 tended for the guidance of the lieges ought to be read in short, 

 in the only way which a Court of Law has a right to read 

 them, namely, in the plain common -sense meaning of the 

 words they would have found them as consistent and intelli- 

 gible, and as full of good sense, as any Acts in the Statute 

 Book. But this would not satisfy the Scotch Court ; any man 

 might do that they must do something more they must 

 see difficulties where none existed put constructions upon 

 words the reverse of what in their natural sense they bore, and 

 discover intentions in the ancient Legislators which never 

 entered into their heads, else where would be their superiority 

 over others ? Besides, as we said before, plain common- 

 sense seems to be held in utter contempt where quibbles, and 

 sophisms, and subtleties, and chimerical distinctions are alone 

 attended to. This we cannot too often repeat, because it cannot 

 be too often impressed upon the Scotch public, who are gulled 

 with what is called law, and denied JUSTICE. The Court accord- 

 ingly declared that the prohibitions in the statutes were 

 intended by the Legislature to be confined to rivers, or fresh 

 waters, and they held and still hold out this as LAW the law 

 of the statutes and daily decide upon questions of fishing 

 property by this law. Now, without any disrespect to the 

 Court, which we hold, as in duty bound, in high reverence, we 

 deny that this is the law ; we maintain that it is NOT the law 

 of the statutes, but law of the Court of Session's own mak- 



