PLEADINGS. 221 



than their reasonable share, but to the detriment and injury of the other 

 tenants in common, the remonstrants set up a right to continue, upon 

 the ground that they have, by continual uses, acquired a prescriptive 

 right thereby, and of which they ought not to be deprived. 



However this might be between individuals, it is well settled that no 

 right of this kind can be set up as against the State, nor against indi- 

 viduals if objection is made within the time limited by law. 



To illustrate : Suppose a town owns a piece of land to be used in com- 

 mon by the inhabitants for the pasturage of cows. For some reason but 

 few avail themselves of the privilege, who continue to use it for a num- 

 ber of years exclusively, and without any interference on the part of the 

 others. 



In time, finding the pasturage is more than is necessary for their cattle, 

 these few conceive the field could be made more profitable, and conclude 

 to turn the grass into hay, and in this manner they have not only enough 

 for their own cows, but can send a large amount to market. 



Tbis course continues, but by and by some of the others wish also to 

 avail themselves of their right, and undertake to turn their cows into the 

 field. Upon this the old occupiers object, and say they have so long 

 used the land for raising hay that no new occupiers can come in, or at 

 least if they do they must wait until the crop is first gathered. 



To do this would deprive them of most of the season, and the pastur- 

 age would be merely nominal or nothing. 



Under a privilege to catch fish under the charter, to be exercised and 

 enjoyed equally and reasonably with the remainder of the people, cer- 

 tain persons, not satisfied with the ordinary hook-and-line method, intrO' 

 duce purse-seines in or about 1822, continue this until 1846, when, find- 

 ing another method by which they can take them in larger quantities 

 than with seines, they introduce the trap-seines. This is so effectual 

 that, it would appear by the statements of reliable persons, they have 

 caught, apparently, every scup of any size that was formerly in the bay. 

 And the petitioners, after remaining quiet for several years, after it 

 was evident to them that scup were decreasing in numbers yearly, and 

 that this decrease, in their opinion, was entirely owing to the trap-fish- 

 ing, when they now come and ask for legislative action to stop the ex- 

 termination, they are met by the trappers' assertion that they have a 

 right to go on and continue, for the reason that they have acquired the 

 right under the charter and constitution. 



If this be sound doctrine, every one else, under the present state of 

 the fish, is deprived of the rights granted him under the charter; for 

 the privilege of fishing where qo fish are to be found, is equivalent to no right 

 to catch fish. 



The right of fishing, when in common, must be construed to be con- 

 fined within reasonable bounds; and what bounds and what is reasona- 

 ble must and can only be determined by the legislature. 



This fishing, as carried on, is a monopoly. There are tweuty-eight 

 traps or places for setting traps, and these have been in the hands of 

 the same parties for nearly, if not quite, twenty-five years. It is so ar- 

 ranged among these parties, that it is practically impossible for any other 

 to gain admission into this close-borough system. Let others attempt to 

 occupy their ground, and from whom would we hear, or, if not hear, how 

 soon would we understand the different view they would take of the 

 doctrine they now set up ? 



It would no longer be the free power and liberty of fishing. The 

 ground they would* then assume would be, that they had acquired, by 



