The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-11-13
RIPARIAN RIGHTS CASE
SUPREME COURT DECISION IN FA-
vOR OF THE GOVERNMENT.
Porto Rico and Philippine Cases, In
voIving Important Points, Not to
he Argued Until Dec. II.

WASHINGTON, Nov 12.--In the United
States Supreme Court to-day Justice Har-
Ian rendered the opinion of the court in
the case of Gilmore S. Scanton versus Eben
S. Wheeler. coming to the court on writ of
error from the Supreme Court of the State
of Michigan. The case involved the ripar-
ian rights of owners on navigable streams
to damages for the loss of accessibility 10
such streams caused by government i'm
provements made for the purpose of i'm
proving navigation. A pier erected at st.
Mary's Falls. Mich, cut off Scranton's ac-
cess to the river. The Michigan court de-
cided against Scranton and to-day's opin-
ion confirmed that decision. In delivering
the opinion Justice Harlan said:
THE vital question is whether the con-
stitutional inhibition on the taking CT
private property for public use without
just compensation is applicable. OF course
every part of the Constitution is binding
on Congress as on the people. The guar
antees prescribed by it for the security OF
private property must be respected by all.
But whether navigation upon waters over
which Congress may exert it's authority re-
quires Improvement at all or improvement
within its discretion; and the judiciary is
without power to control defeat the will
of Congress so long as that branch Of the
government does not trascend the limits
established by the supreme law of the
land"
The opinion held that the broad power
with which Congress is invested is not
burdened with the condition that a riparian
owner whose land borders upon a naviga-
BILE water Of the United States shall be
compensated for his right of access to the
nav1gable part OF such river whenever such
right ceases TO be of value solely in conse-
quence of the Improvement of navigation
by piers that rest upon submerged lands
away from the shore line. THE primary
use of the waters and the lands under
them, says the opinion, lis for purposes
of navigation, and the erection OF piers in
them to improve navigation for the public
is entirely consistent with such use and
infringes no right of the riparian owner.
In our opinion IL was not intended by the
trainers OF the Constitution that the para
mount authority or Congress TO improve
the navigation of the public naviga BILE
waters of the United States should be
crippled by compelling the government to
make compensation for the injury that
might indirectly result from an improve
ment to riparian owners right of access to
navigability." A dissenting opinion was de-
livered by Justice Shiras and concurred in
The Supreme Court to-day postponed
the argument in what are known as the
Porto Rico and Philippine cases until Dec.
II. The cases are entitled in one instance
~. II. Goethe VS.. The United States
which involves the right to collect duty
on goods imported from Porto Rico into
the United States after the peace treaty
with Spain went into effect, and Fourteen
Diamond Rings VS.. The United States"
In this latter case Emil i. J. Pepke, a
United States soldier, is the claimant of
the rings and he is accused of smuggling
them into the United States from the Phil
ippine islands. The postponement was
made at the instance of Attorney General
Griggs, and the object of 1t is to have
other involving cognate questions now
pending i'm the United States Circuit
Courts argued in the Supreme Court, to-
gether with these two cases. In their
broader significance these cases involve
the question whether Porto Rico and the
Philippines are part Of the United States,
and such entitled to free commercial
intercourse with ii.
Chief Justice Fuller to-day announced
the refusal of the Supreme Court to review
the proceedings of the provisional court
established by Governor General Davis in
Porto Rico in the case of Jose Juan Vidal
and others by which they were ousted
from, the municipal offices of the town of
Guayama in that island. The refusal was
based upon the ground that the court is
not empowered to review the proceedings
of military tribunal by certiorari
Announcement was made to-day that the
Supreme Court would take a recess of a
fortnight from next Monday