The daily morning Astorian. [volume] (Astoria, Oregon) 1883-1899, 1894-03-04

''0N'-NH ~ VI ~ blAeiN Nd0t Oc VERY kIcdl
The middle of the main ship channel,
the middle of the widest channel, !" ar
the terms used in the act of admission
and in this broad river of shifting sand
and changing channels, 1t would not in
frequently be difficult, If not impossible
to determine for the practical purpose.
Of a law case on which side of such {
variable boundary particular struc
ture might be situated, but if the court.
of either state could take jurisdiction
uncertainty would cause no inconveni
ence.
Second, the provision that such river
should be public highway, forever
free to the citizens of this state, would
have been nugatory if there had been
withheld from the legislature of this
state the power Of keeping such high
way free and unobstructed.
To protect this grant of free and
unobstrueted highway upon the Coluin-
bia river, congress granted to this state
this concurrent jurisdiction in civil and
criminal cases, and in my Judgment it
has the right to regulate or entirely re-
move an obstruction placed in such
highway, whether under the authority
of grant by the Legislature Of a sister
state or otherwise.
Take this particular case, for ex-
ample. There has been introduced in
evidence by defendant the law of Wash
ington territory authorizing the licens-
ing of fish traps on the Columbia river
Under its provisions all4that is neces-
sary is for some citizen to select any
portion of the river he chooses. so that
it Is north Of the main or middle chan
mel, and pay $40 and he must be Ii
censed to build a trap He may select
lhe very center of a channel used for
the daily purposes of commerce; there
is no restriction, no discretion granted
to the fish commissioner. He must
grant a license.
Such law is in its scope and policy
SO contrary to the provisions of our act
OF admission into the union, so viola
tive of the compact by which the wat
ers of the Columbia river are made
public highway for all the citizens of
both states, that l feel assured that 1t
is wholly void and will no doubt be de-
clared SO by the courts of the state of
Washington, should that question be
brought before them.
Third, another object of this grant of
jurisdiction was to enable
either state to protect the fishing in
dustries of the Columbia river
1t has been held by the courts of the
United States that the fish in a river
are the common property of the citizens
Of those states along whose borders |
such rivers flow,
The value of the Columbia as a sal
mon producing river was well known
when Oregon was admitted, and it is
very reasonable to conclude that this
sovereignty on the river was
granted In order that the legislature of
his state might by appropriate legis-
alton preserve to the people of this
state the free enjoyment of their share
If this great source of wealth.
The business of catching and prepar-
ng salmon for market has grown to be
me of the most valuable industries of
he Pacific Coast, and if a sister state
an by legislation license the wholesale
destruction of fish, or by mere inaction
'ermit the business to be so conducted
hat the supply of salmon must newt
IDLY be destroyed in few years, then
in effect Is permitted to destroy the
ommon property of the people of this
tate IN the salmon OF the Columbia
liver. 1t was not the intention of con-
,ress to permit any state along the Co
umbia river to perpetrate such an in
ustice upon it's own citizens and such
N outrage upon ours and it therefore
ave to either state the right to pro-
libit any act that would have such
'aieful consequences.
SiAAAN SAS ASAS5Oii5 are lile IetSOIS
hat led congress to divide the sover-
ignty of the two states upon the Co
lmbia river, and that upon those mat
ers that are within the reasons Of the
ct Of admission, both states have
light to legislate for the protection Of
he common rights of their citizens, and
n the very nature of things there can !
ever be any conflict OF jurisdiction on
hese subjects; any legislation by either
tate in protection of these common
ights is valid; any legislation by either !
tate in derogation Of such rights is
old, and the courts Of the United
tates stand as the common arbiter be-
veen the parties whenever there shall
rise any apparent conflict
In this case there is no real conflict. I
efendant held a license from Wash
lgton territory that authorized him. or Q
Imported 70 authorize him, e rpainlain
fish trap Tha law CT Oregon did not =
retend to deprive him of this right, =
ut only provided that he should so use :
is property that the business of fishing : :
lould not be destroyed, ana this it :
ad a perfect right to DO anywhere up
4 the Columbia riveF. y
The motion to dismiss Is overruled. :
STANDS WITHOUT A RIVAL. 7