The record-union., 1895-12-09
CORDELIA CLUBS TREOPASS Case.
Why 1t Was Denied an Injunction
Against Outsiders.
Judge Buckles Holds That Lessees do
Not Have the Rights of
Proprietors.

Some weeks ago Judge Buckles OF 80
lano County denied the application OF
Charles w. Kellogg for an order re-
straining William King and others IroIh
trespassing and hunting on the IN
closed tract of 1000 acres of the Sulsuh
marsh leased by the Cordelia ShootlhS
Club, and on Saturday he filed his de-
cision setting forth his reasons for de-
nying the application.
Briefly stated, Judge Buckles holos
that the plaintiff (and his assoclates)
did not have a lease of the exclusive
shooting privileges on the Pierce tract
that it was for only forty persons, ana
that the proprietor also reserved the
right to hunt and shoot thereon; that
the land was not inclosed by the owner
but by the lessees; that evidence was
not produced to show that the defend
ants had conspired to destroy the
plaintiffs rights, and that the plalntlH
had not even tried his statutory remedy
of arresting persons for trespass, nor
his civil remedy for damages.
The decision is very long and ira
verses much extraneouS ground lana
swamp, but finally comes down 10
what the court regards as the legal
points involved. Judge Buckles, Tor IN
stance, condemns the plaintiff'S S custom
of scattering grain upon ponds to at
tract the wildfowl, as also the tenclhS
of portions of marsh lands where Such
ponds exist. These efforts to concen-
trate ducks in certain localities ne Tx
ems unto the placing of flsh-nets from
bank to bank of streams, and TO the set
ting of traps in which to eaten qualls.
Judge Buckles is not very happy IN
his Illustrations The feeding Of ducks
does not put them into the hunters bag,
nor are birds that fly over fence IN
quite as helpless a condition as the nsn
that cannot get through or past net,
nor as the quailS that once get lnSlue d
trap. Perhaps the Judge is not person
ally familiar with the various artS TO
which hunters have to resort an order TO
even get a shot at the ducks, but II he be
it is safe to say he would not refuse 10
SQUAT in a bunch of tule II he saw a
flock of nice cans" come sailing in his
direction.
Toconceal ones self from the sharp eyes
of the wary waterfowl in order TO get
shot at them is, of course, taking
mean advantage of the birds. 1t is also
a selfish thing to do if there be another
fellow little farther on who would ike
to get a whack at the same Hock, put
whose chances will be spoiled II you IN
sist on shooting. Batting pond IS TAX
inc. a no meaner advantage or the plrdS'
and interferes no more with the rights
and privileges of other hunters than TO
sneak out of sight into blind, put
ont decoys and thus hog all the
shooting YOU can while out for Few
hours sport
Possibly the worthy Judge of Solano
would do none of these things, but II
he were to go hunting for ducks ana
scorned the use of decoyS ana tule
-, = We
lessen some other fellows bag, the court
might as well stay at home.
The decision of Judge Buckles pelng
based on what he regards as fatal omlS-
sions on the part of the plaintln IN at
tempting to make out a case, leaves the
issue in a still unsettled condition II
the p1aintiff had shown vindict1Ve
Spirit and caused the arrest OF the de-
PENDANTS under the trespass law, ne
might have been successful in sending
Them to iail. Or, if he had prevailed on
the owner of the land to apply Tor the
Injunction. instead of himself, as lessee,
doing so. it might have been granted
Whatever may be right and just IN the
unfortunate controversy should be set
tied by the courts at as early day as
possible. so that all men may know
what their rights are.
1t is worthy of note in this connec-
ton. that Judge Buckles takes occasion
in his decision to remark that the
amendment made by the last Legisla-
ture to the treSpass law-eXemptlng
salt marsh lands from its operation
is unconstitutional, as it would refuse
to owners of salt marsh lands the same
protection accorded to owners Of up
land.
The following is Judge Buckles own
summary of his reasons for denying
the application for an injunction.
First-Plaintiff' lease gives him
license to hunt on the premises, but no
right to prevent other people from COM
ing on the same ground to hunt when
they do not modest his right to hunt.
Second-He has not acted fairly to-
ward the defendants in batting the
ponds to entice game TO come there
from outside the inclosure, and because
of the inclosure he has erected.