May 10, 1888.] 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



SO© 



THE MONROE MARSHES. 



[From the Monroe (Mich.) Democrat,, April 26.] 



FEOM the earliest periods the Monroe Marsh has been 

 a faTorite resort for waterfowl, so much so that its 

 fame became spread over the whole country, and as this 

 class of game became scarce in the more thickly popu- 

 lated States, sportsmen began to make this locality their 

 regular resort during the ducking season. Our former 

 old townsman, Joseph Guyor, seeing an opportunity to 

 better his financial condition, located a house on the south 

 bank of the lower canal, and "Uncle Joe's Marsh Hotel'' 

 became a famous and favorite resort for shooters from 

 the East, South and Canada, and every spring and fall 

 found the house crowded to its utmost capacity with en- 

 thusiastic sportsmen. It however soon become apparent 

 that while the shooters were growing more numerous the 

 game was becoming more scarce, and ways and means 

 of remedying this difficulty formed a frequent subject of 

 discussion among the habitants of the marsh. Among 

 the many means proposed to accomplish this it was pro- 

 posed to stop the shooting after sundown and before sun- 

 rise, to limit the number of shots allowed each man, etc., 

 etc., but they were found impracticable without an or- 

 ganization, and it was then the acquiring of a title to a 

 certain amount of the real estate, and an organization of 

 a club was proposed. This idea was considered both by 

 the visiting and home sportsmen for a number of seasons 

 without any result until the year 1880, when three or 

 four visiting shooters placed funds in the hands of Mr. 

 George Dawson for the purpose of purchasing marsh 

 lands and forming a club. It was deemed important 

 that at least a sufficient number of citizens of Michigan 

 be included among the members of the club to allow it 

 to incorporate under the laws of the State, and conse- 

 quently propositions to join were made to many of our 

 citizens, but the cost seemed to be an insurmountable 

 objection, and so after leaving the subscription book 

 open for more than a year, the organization was perfected 

 without any local membership, and the Monroe Marsh 

 Company was incorporated under the laws of the State 

 of New York with a membership of 25 members, and 

 possessed by lease and purchase about 2,000 acres of marsh, 

 including the Guyor property — subsequent purchases 

 have considerably increased this amount. The prices 

 paid as compared with previous valuations of this prop- 

 erty was .very large, and many of our citizens dis- 

 posed of property that before had been worthless, 

 for good prices. A handsome club house and a number 

 of other buildings were erected on the site of the old 

 hotel and such measures as were deemed lawful and 

 necessary to reserve the right of shooting to members of 

 the club were adopted. These regulations became dis- 

 tasteful to many of our local sportsmen who had been in 

 the habit of hunting over this territory at will, and as it 

 became more and more apparent that the Marsh Company 

 were determined to enforce their rules, the f eeling against 

 it became more pronounced, until it culminated in the 

 organization of the Liberal Club, whose object was to 

 test the claims of the Marsh Company to certain territory 

 for shooting purposes, and necessarily involving a series 

 of litigations. With this end in view Mr. H. C. Jackson 

 located himself with the usual paraphernalia for duck 

 shooting at a point opposite where the visible boundary 

 between the Marsh Company's property and the lake 

 had been washed away. He was warned off by the com- 

 pany's agent, but declined to go, and consequently was 

 arrested on a civil process. The case was tried in the 

 circuit court for this county in the April term, 1886, and 

 a judgment entered for the Marsh Company. Subse- 

 quently Mr. Jackson appealed to the Supreme Court, 

 where the case has been twice argued, and from the fact 

 that no earlier decision was given it would seem that 

 there was a "deadlock" upon the. supreme bench until 

 the advent of Judge Long, with him came the break and 

 the establishment of the company 's rights to the property 

 claimed, and ends a spirited legal con test that has created 

 much interest throughout the State. 



The Supreme Court affirms the judgment of the Circuit 

 Court in giving the Monroe Marsh Company a judgment. 

 The court was divided, J ustices Moore and Campbell dis- 

 senting. The opinion was delivered by Justice Champlin. 

 It is very elaborate and lengthy, and quotations of the 

 principal points will >>e sufficient to show its tenor. He 

 says: 



This is an action for trespass upon land covered with water. 

 The declaration alleges that the defendant broke and entered 

 and with his boat, oars and paddle in rowing and punting broke 

 down and destroyed the wild rice and grass then growing, and 

 with his gun shot at, wounded, killed and frightened away, the 

 wild ducks and other game then nesting and feeding and other 

 injuries, etc. The defendant pleaded the general issue and gave 

 notice that he would show that the premises upon which the in- 

 juries were supposed to have been committed were a common 

 nighway and free to defendant, and by virtue thereof, and in the 

 use thereof, he did all and singular the acts complained of, as he 

 lawfully might. 



Upon trial of the cause in the Circuit Court a. patent was of- 

 fered in evidence from the United States to the State of Michigan 

 covering the land in question, to the introduction of which in 

 evidence objection was made for the reason that the patent which 

 bore date of the 18th day of August, 1883, was issued without legal 

 authority. The objection was overruled and the patent admit- 

 ted. The ruling of the court is assigned as error. It is claimed 

 by counsel that the want of legal authority to issue the patent 

 consists in the fact that prior to its issue the land in question was 

 reserved for lighthouse purposes. 



There is no competent evidence in the case that the land was 

 ever reserved for lighthouse purposes. 



Considerable evidence was introduced showing the present 

 character of the la nd in dispute, from which it pretty conclu- 

 sively appears that it bears the description of lands granted by 

 act of Congress as "marsh and over-fluwed lands." Plaintiff's 

 testimony tended to show that at the time of the survey in 1850 

 there was a shore of Lake Erie running along continuously east- 

 wardly of tbo place where the defendant was when lie did the 

 shooting, a distance of more than 200ft., consisting of a sand, bank 

 upon which grew a few trees and bushes. East of this bank was 

 Lake Erie and west, of it there was an extensive marsh, grown up 

 with weeds, wild lice and rushes and mostly covered with shal- 

 low water; through this marsh ran what was known as Sandy 

 Creek. At some time since 1850 the waters of Lake Erie have 

 penetrated through this bank and made a passage at first narrow 

 but increasing in width year by year by the action of the water 

 so that the shore, line consisting of a sand bank had been thrown 

 backward and inward and has formed a well-defined bay, with a 

 distance of over 1,500ft. from headland to headland. The shore 

 - or boundary between the lake and the marsh does not form a 

 continuous line but leaves an opening at the western extremity 

 of the bay, through which the waters of the lake unite with those 

 of Sandy Creek. This opening is about "95ft. wide and is known 

 as "The Cut." 



There was a large amount of testimony introduced to show 

 that this bay as well as Sandy Creek was navigable wa ter and in 

 the disposition made of the case in the court below the fact, was 

 conceded that it was na vigable and used as such and I shall con- 

 sider that fact established. It is also a conceded fact that tho 

 dofendant was in a boat in tho navigable waters of the bay, a nd 

 by the aid of some rushes that grew up through the water and a 

 structure called "a hide" and several artificial ducks as decoys, 

 was engaged in shooting ducks upon the premises covered by the 



plaintiff's patent. That he was requested to desist and leavo the 

 premises by the plaintiff, through his agent, but refused to do so, 

 claiming the right, to be where ho was and to shoot ducks 

 and game because he was in the navigable waters of Lake 

 Erie. 



A point is made by counsel for defendant that at the time the 

 Sstate issued ftg patent for this land in 1883, the shore had washed 

 away and the bay existed as a part of the waters of Lake Erie, 

 and the mere grant of land could convey no greater rights as to 

 fishing and shooting to the grantee than the grantor bad. It 

 «eems to me that the plaintiff is unaffected by the changed con- 

 dition of the shore. In my opinion the grant was effective to pass 

 the title to the submerged land. The patent from the State 

 ,>assod such title as it had and if prior to its date a portion of tho 

 and had become submerged by the slow and imperceptible en- 

 croachment of the waters of the lake, the State still would bo the 

 owner and could grant the bed of the lake to whom it chose so 

 long as such grant did not interfere with private vested rights. 



1 'nder other circumstances it might, require some, legislation to 

 convoy. But with regard to swamp lands the legislature already 

 provided for their disposition. Overflowed lands are such as are 

 subject to such periodical or frequent overflows as to require 

 levees or embankments to keep out the water. It does not make 

 any difference whether the overflow be by fresh water or by the 

 rising of riverB or lakes or by the flow of the tides. Can it be 

 doubted (hat the plaintiff has the right to construct a levee or 

 embankment along the original shore line and thus exclude the 

 water and tlm public from the premises? 



The plaintiff claims the exclusive right of hunting within the 

 territory covered by his patent from the State. He founds this 

 right upon hi 8 proprietary interests in the soil under the water. 

 Ho does not deny that so long as the premises remain in their 

 present condition that the public have a right of navigation over 

 lis land, but he claims such right, is a. mere casement and extends 

 simply to a right of passage over his lands in such vessels as are 

 capable of navigating the waters of the same. He insists on the 

 exclusive right to hunt and capture all wild game while on his 

 own premises and that this right of capture is as much a right of 

 properly as the right to make any other use of his own premises. 



Since every person has the right of dominion as to the lawful 

 use of the sod owned by him, no man can sport or hunt upon 

 another's land, hut by consent, of the owner. The defendant claims 

 that be had a right to shoot the wildfowl from his boat because as 

 the waters wore navigable where he was he had a right to be 

 there. There is a plausibility in the position which considered in 

 the abstract is quite, forcible, and if applied to waters where there 

 is no private ownership to the soil thereunder would be un- 

 answerable. But so far as the. plaintiff is concerned, defendant 

 had no right, to be where he was, except, for the purpose of pur- 

 suing the implied license held out to the public of navigating the 

 waters over his land. So long as that license continued he could 

 navigate the water with his vessel. He could seek shelter In the 

 bay and cast his anchor therein in case of storm, but he had no 

 rig'ht to anchor his decoys for the purpose of attracting ducks 

 within the reach of his gun. Such acts arc not incident to navi- 

 gation and in doing them the defendant was not exercising the 

 implied license to navigate the waters of the bay but they were 

 an abuse of such license. 



It does not, follow that because a person Is where he has a right 

 to be, he cannot be held liable for trespass. A person has the 

 right to drive his cattle along the highway, but he has no right to 

 depasture the grass with bis cattle in the highway adjoining the 

 laud of another person. In the case under consideration the de- 

 fendant had the right of using the waters of the bay for the 

 purpose of a public; highway in the navigation of his boat over it, 

 but he had no right to interfere with the plaintiff's use thereof 

 for hunting, which belongs to him as owner of the soil. And this 

 case seems to have been planned to test the plaintiff's right to 

 the private and exclusive use of the land covered by his patent 

 for sporting purposes. As owner of the soil under the water I 

 think he is entitled to such exclusive right and that the judg- 

 ment should be affirmed. 



I may add in conclusion that aside from the ownership of the 

 plaintiff of the locus in quo, the only important question in the 

 case is "whether a man has the exclusive right of fowling upon 

 his own land." If he has, it can make no difference with that 

 tight whatever whether it be upland or covered with water. 



ROYAL HUNTING IN 1520. 



AMONG the state papers of the reign of King Henry 

 VIII,, there occurs a letter from Sir Richard Wyng- 

 feld to that King, descriptive of a hunting scene of that 

 day, from which the following extract is taken, the only 

 change frotn the original being in the spelling, which is 

 made to conform to that of modern times: 



"Soon after 3 o'clock the said afternoon, he (Francis I. 

 of France) went to hunt for the wild hoar, and caused me 

 to go with him, which boar was killed after such manner 

 as here f olloweth. When he came to the place in the which 

 the boar lay, there was cast off one hound only to him, 

 the which incontinently had him at the bay. And then 

 immediately was thrown off upon a twenty couple of 

 hounds, with three or four brace of niastiffs*let slip, all 

 which drew to the bay, and there plucked down the poor 

 boar, and the King with divers others being afoot, with 

 their boar spears dispatched him shortly, and then the 

 King himself, after their fashion, cut off the right foot of 

 the said boar, which done he mounted on horseback, and 

 passed through the forest to have seen a flight to the 

 heron, at the request of Monsieur de Lottryke, unto which 

 disport, I assure Your Grace he hath no more affection 

 than Your Highness hath, notwithstanding the said 

 Seignor de Lottryke, with divers others, do what they 

 ban possible to fashion an appetite to be in him, which 

 shall De hard for them to bring about after my conceit. 



"All which maketh me to remember my father Tyler, 

 when he sheweth Your Highness of the great pleasures 

 which he finds in his hawks, when it fortuneth them to 

 do well, which I dare not say, is very seldom; but how 

 fantastic they be, he never maketh boast. 



"Sir, by all the way, it pleased your said good brother 

 to devise with me, which was in manner all founded of 

 the manner of their hunting by force, saying plainly that 

 he thought the Frenchmen were only they, which were 

 masters of that craft. Whereunto I. shewed him that he 

 should have much ado to cause Your Grace to pass him that 

 point, for though it so were that he used the said manner 

 of chaBing, and none other, which was a great reason 

 that he might be more skilful in it; yet I assured him 

 that Your Highness with divers such others as you have 

 brought up in the same manner of hunting, I was sure 

 could not be amended by any nation christened, and 

 further shewed him that, though Your Grace had as 

 great delight to hunt by force as any Prince might have, 

 yet Your Highness, used as well, many other fashions of 

 hunting as well to the contentation of such as waited 

 upon you, as for your own pleasure, to the intent that 

 every man might take pastime after his appetite, some 

 with their hounds, some with their greyhounds and some 

 with then bows. In all which sorts of hunting I 

 shewed, to know Your Grace, to have no fellow for the 

 assured and perfect knowledge of all that belonged to 

 that art." Edward Jack. 



FrbdehictON, Canada. 



Montreal, Can., May 2.— The Fish and Game Protec- 

 tive Club had their annual meeting this afternoon, and 

 out of a membership of over 300 there were only 30 pres- 

 ent. T. C. Brainerd, president, occupied the chair and 

 .Tno. Nelson, Jr., acted as secretary. The annual reports 

 showed a balance to the credit of the club, of $530. The 

 following committee was elected: Messrs. L. A. Boyer, 

 T. C. Brainerd, J no. Nelson, Jr., W. H. Rintoul, J. H. 

 Stearns, Jas. Slessor, H. R. Ives, Selkirk Cross, C. E. 

 Sannderson and A. H. Sims, 



LOADING TOOLS. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



There seems to be, judging from the various articles in 

 the rifle departments of the sporting papers, a demand 

 for better ammunition than the cartridge manufacturers 

 place upon the market. The writer himself has been 

 "seeking for light" and has come to the conclusion that 

 the only way to get what you want is to load your own 

 cartridges. To do this, it is necessary to possess a set of 

 reloading tools. Now there are "tools and tools," but 

 some of these tools are not what one wishes, when it 

 comes to practical work, and for finish and general neat- 

 ness of appearance they are sadly wanting. 



Some time since my attention was called to the reload- 

 ing apparatus manufactured by the Ideal Manufacturing 

 Co., of New Haven. That famous bear slayer "P.," whose 

 able articles on hunting and ammunition appeared in the 

 Forest and stream and other journals in the past few 

 years, employed this company to "build" him a set of 

 moulds for the famous express bullet used by him, and, I 

 understand, has found them "the thing." Wishing some 

 ammunition of this description I ordered a set of the 

 special moulds and reloaders. The reloading tool is the 

 best thing of the kind it has been my good fortune to 

 see, and if any one wishes a tool which will enable him 

 to load cartridges in various ways, this is the thing. Be- 

 sides the extra finish and fine work on these tools they 

 possess points of utility that no other reloaders on the 

 market have. The double adjustable chamber is of the 

 highest importance, as it enables one to load different 

 balls with different loads, and therefore does not confine a 

 rifleman to one set cartridge. With this adjustable 

 chamber a round ball can be loaded with small powder 

 charge, thus placing the means of practice with a field 

 rifle m the hands of those who must use a limited range. 

 This of itself is of great moment, as if one uses a small 

 caliber, light rifle, and one set of sights for practice. 

 They will hardly find their larger and heavier rifle with 

 other sights the same thing when they are afield. 



The express moulds.are very finely made, and if the bul- 

 lets cast by them are satisfactory upon testing, they will 

 prove the thing for large game — this the writer feels 

 convinced they will be, basing his hopes on the experi- 

 ments and practice of "P," 



There is one other little tool made by the Ideal Co. that 

 is worthy of mention, the little shotgun cartridge re- 

 loader. While it is now the fashion and custom to use 

 machine-loaded ammunition for shotguns {most exten- 

 sively, I think all sportsmen, especially those who take 

 long jaunts into far away places, need some article to re- 

 load shells that is light, compact and practicable. Here 

 we have it, an utensil which does all any loader can— 

 decap, recap, load, close shell and also can be used for 

 a shell extractor if shell sticks in gun. Weight only ten 

 ounces and all in a little box six inches by two and one- 

 half inches, carried in the pocket and always ready; and 

 last but not least, so cheap that any one can afford to 

 own one that can afford to own a gun . Prairie Dog. 



Detroit, Michigan. 



Unnecessary Mortality in Transporting Native 

 Quail. — Editor Forest and Stream: I have for a number 

 of years been trying to get some live quail, principally to 

 try again to breed in confinement, something I tried and 

 partially succeeded in a few years ago; but for the last 

 four or five years I have bought some eight dozen birds, 

 at $4 per dozen, and paid, I think, as much as $1.50 per 

 dozen for express, and I have not been able to save one 

 live bird. What few came through alive died shortly 

 after their arrival. This has been a great disappointment 

 to me, and I know of parties in this vicinity who lost 

 every one of ten dozen quail shipped direct from Tennes- 

 see. Mine came from New York. I believe this to be all 

 wrong. It is a loss pecuniarily, those who spend their 

 money for this are enthusiastic sportsmen, and the loss of 

 the birds is felt more than the money. It is cruelty to 

 the birds to be taken in traps and sent on long journeys 

 improperly boxed, with no food, unless a little is thrown 

 in at the start, to be eaten long before the end of the 

 journey is reached, or to become unfit for food; and it is 

 a well known fact that birds suffer more for the want of 

 water than for food, and there is nothing to show that 

 the poor birds have had one drop of water during their 

 journey. Now, let us start with the fact that our native 

 quail are as hardy as their cousins which came from 

 Italy a few years ago. Out of 125 I found only three 

 dead ones. The next year, counting them as carefully 

 as we could, as we released them in squads of six or eight, 

 we made 101, only 100 having been ordered. I think 

 that with proper treatment our native quail can be trans- 

 ported with as little loss as can the birds from Italy. 

 Again, why should it cost me more to transport my birds 

 here from New York and have them all die, than it does 

 to bring them from Italy to New York and have them all 

 live? .Start them all dead like any other package and it 

 cost say fifty cents; start them alive and have them all 

 die for want of a little care and it increases the cost three 

 fold. There is great need of reform, and I hope to hear 

 from others who are interested, and that some method 

 may be adopted which will be more merciful to the birds 

 and more satisfactory to the buyers. — James Wight. 



A bill which has passed the Senate and is now pend- 

 ing in the House of Representatives provides much 

 needed legislation for the Yellowstone National Park. 

 Existing laws are utterly insufficient to protect and pre- 

 serve the forests and the game of this great national res- 

 ervation; and there is great danger if steps are not 

 promptly taken by the passage of some such measure as 

 that referred to that irreparable injury will be done to 

 the park. The destruction of tho forests will not only 

 deprive the park of one of its chief beauties, but will en- 

 danger the water supply and turn the park into a. desert. 

 It wall destroy also the refuge for the game which ought 

 to be preserved, not only in the interest of sport, but of 

 science as well. The Forest and Stream of New York 

 has taken especial interest in this matter, and has sent 

 out innumerable petitions for signature, many of which 

 have been returned with a long array of names. Mich- 

 igan is well represented in the lists as published in ths 

 Forest and Stream ; but Detroit seems to have been 

 overlooked. This is not as it should be. There ought to 

 be a rousing petition from this city alone as an evidence 

 of the interest taken here in the objects embraced in th» 

 bill. Some one of our enthusiastic sportsmen should 

 take the matter in hand at once.— Detroit Free, Press, 

 May 2, 



