The daily morning Astorian. [volume] (Astoria, Oregon) 1883-1899, 1895-07-04
Judge McBriie Renders an I'M
portant Decision.
eEYoNp poweR OF coNeRgss
To Change the Enabling Act Of Ore
gon's Admission as a State
Comprehensive Decision.

Yesterday in the circuit court in the
case Of the Astoria and Columbia River
railroad VS.. w. c. Parsons, the court ap-
pointed b. G. Hegardt arbitrator to de-
termine the amount Of damages.
The suit of VIM. Kroling VS.. Chas. os-
good for work performed occupiedsthe at
tentlon Of the jury nearly all day and up
to late hour no decision was rendered.
In the matter of F. Feakes' application
for habeas corpus, case was dismissed.
In the cases of the state VS.. II. Matson
and Chas. Wiken for Illegal fishing the
court fined the defendants so each or Is
days imprisonment in the county jail.
In stating the decision the court rem
dered the Following opinion:
In the Circuit Court of the State Of Ore
gon, for Clatsop County,
The SUITE of Oregon VS.. Chas. Wiken:
In this case the defendant was indicted,
tried and convicted of the offense of TAX
ing salmon by means of fish trap or
pound net, in the Columbia river during
the weekly close season, that is on Sun
day.
The statute under which defendant was
indicted and convicted is that 1t shall not
be lawful to take or fish for salmon in
the Columbia River during the weekly
close time" that Is, between six o'clock
p. m. on Saturday and six o'clock p. m.
on the following Sunday.
1t is not denied and was admitted on
the trial that the defendant did so take
salmon on the Columbia river within the
time so prohibited by the laws Of Oregon,
and if the state has not exceeded its leg
islative jurisdiction the defendant Is
guilty Of the offense charged.
1t Is agreed and admitted that the
fishing for which defendant was indicted
was done north OF the middle channel
Of the Columbia River, and within the
territorial boundaries of the state Of
Oregon, and the counsel for defendant
contended that the laws of this state
have no force or effect in cases of this
character, beyond the middle channel Of
the Columbia River.
This presents to the court the important
question as to the extent to which the
state of Oregon can exercise concurrent
jurisdiction on the Columbia River.
1t is claimed on behalf of the state
that both states have full police power
on the Columbia river, and, that in to the
exercise of such powers either state has
full right to legislate and to enforce its
legislation over the whole of that portion
of the Columbia forming their common
boundary.
This claim has constantly been assisted
and exercised by the legislature and the
courts of this state ever since the
admission of oregon into the Union
and to some extent 1t has also
been exercised by the courts of the
adjoining commonwealth, and 1t is on
ly since the indiscriminate and reckless
| fishing for salmon have threatened the
entire extinction OF that great Industry
and evoked somewhat vigorous eirorts
for its protection, that any consloeraple
protest has been made against the exer-
else by our courts of criminal Jurisdic-
tion over the whole river.
Oregon's claim of jurisdiction Is founded
upon the act of congress admitting 1t In
to the Union. At that time Washington
was still territory, mere creature OF
congressional legislation. 1t was wholly
competent for congress to take from, or
give to, such territory any powers OF leg
islation as 1t might see fit. Congress
could alter its boundaries, regulate Its
jurisdiction at Its own pleasure, even to
the extent of entirely abolishing, II 1t
chose, the territorial government, or or
anneXing or parcelling 1t out among ad-
jacent states or territories.
stances Oregon was admitted Into the
Union, and by the act of admission, Or
egons boundaries and Jurisdiction upon
the Columbia river were firmly establish
ed upon the Columbia river beyond the
power of congress to change, because 1t
is elementary, that congress cannot. with
out the consent of a state, withdraw
from. or repeal the compact by which
such state becomes a member of the
Union, To concede the power of congress
to alter or amend such compact without
the consent of the state would be to con-
cede that It had power to expel a state
from the Union by repeating the act Of
admission. a doctrine as repugnant to our
national idea. as that of the right Of a
state to violate the compact and secede
Tn. the light Of these universally admit
ted principles. let us examine the act of
! admission the sacred and irrepealable
comract between this state and the other
states of the Union.
Section / of said act defines Oregon s
| boundaries. After bringing the west
boundarv line north TO n 9point due west
and onnosite the middle of the north
chin cbanneI Of the Columbia river II
Continues as follows. "Tbence easterly
to and I'm tbe middle channel OF said
river etc " (tracin, the north boundary)
ss1,c,rd,ns, i,,risdlc1ior IN civil and crinn-
in,I cases nnon the Columbia and Snake
river concurrently with states and ter
ritorIes az which these rivers form a
bo,,ndarv IN common with This staten
11th r. s. Statutes at Large. asa.
This is sIbstantIaIIv saving that the
boundary between Oregon. and washing
ton shall be the middle channel OF the
Columbp, river. excent that FOR the mr.
noses Of civil and criminal Jurisdiction
both states shall have a common right
over the whole river. II is an exceptjon
inserted in the very cIause that defnes
the boundaries. and means nractjcallv
that for the purposes mentioned The boun-
dary of Oregon shall be the north shore
and the boundary OF Washington the
south shore.
But as IL to emphasize this construc-
tion and make IL SO plain that the way
faring man need NOT err therein Section
of said act provides further; "The
said state of Oregon shall have concur