Case ID: njl_65/html/0500-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Gaeeison, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

THE STATE v. THOMAS NELSON.
    Submitted July 3, 1900
    Decided November 12, 1900.
    An indictment charging the dredging for oysters from certain prohibited waters north of the line running direct from one designated point in Delaware bay to another and commonly known as the “southwest line,” as established by the act of April 3d, 1S93, is not defective, the line in question being described and designated as a matter of fact and not as matter of law.
    On certiorari.
    
    The following indictment has been removed into this court and a motion made to quash it:
    “Cumberland County, to wit.
    “The Grand Inquest, for the State of New Jersey, and for the body of the county of Cumberland, upon their respective oaths present that Jacob Nelson, late of the township of' Commercial in the county of Cumberland, on the twentjrfirst day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and ninety-nine, at the township of Fairfield,, in the county of Cumberland aforesaid, and within the Jurisdiction of this court, did dredge for, catch and take oysters from the lands of this state under the tidal waters of Delaware bay, north of the line running direct from the mouth of Straight creek to Cross Ledge lighthouse, and commonly known as the ‘southwest line/ as established by an act approved April third, one thousand eight hundred ami ninety-three, entitled ‘Ar supplement to an act entitled “A further supplement to an act entitled ‘An act for the better enforcement in Maurice river cove and Delaware bay of the act entitled “An act for the preservation of clams and oysters,” ’ ” approved April fourteenth, one thousand eight hundred and forty-six, and the supplements thereto approved March eighth, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-two, which further supplement was approved February twentieth, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-six/ between the fifteenth of June, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and ninety-nine, and the first day of April, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred, to wit, on the twenty-first day of December, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and ninety-nine, contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided against the peace of this state the government and dignity of the same.”
    Before Justices Dixon, Gaeeison and Collins.
    For the state, J. Hampton Fithian, prosecutor of the pleas.
    For the prosecutors, Walter H. Bacon and David J. Pan-coast.
    
   The opinion of the court was delivered by

Gaeeison, J.

This indictment charges an offence under chapter 194 of the laws of 1899.

The criticism that the “southwest line” was not as a matter of law established by the act of April 3d, 1893, is without force, admitting it to be true. Both the appellation and the statutory reference follow the words “commonly known as” and form no part of the charge of the bill which in brief is for dredging out of season north of the line running direct from one designated point in the Delaware bay to another. What the facts may be we, of course, do not know, but it is as matter of fact and not as matter of law that the line in question is described and designated.

In his printed argument the prosecutor of this writ has attacked the legislation upon which this indictment is based as being unconstitutional. It seems to be constitutional.

The motion to quash is refused; the indictment may be remitted to the Cumberland sessions for trial.