The weekly true Democrat. (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1905-1912, 1905-12-08
A DANIEL COME
TO JUDGMENT.
County Judge r. Don heLsod's Fam.
Gus AulIet Decision.

Ol SSCliOn =, CndpJeT AOOf, AcIS OF 1891,
charges that the defendant unlawfully
caught with a seine, fish in the waters
of the State Of Florida, and caught
mullet in said waters between the 18th
day Of November and the 31st day of
December, 1905. The defendant pleaded
not guilty, but admitted fishing at his
fishery and catching fish between the
dates named in the affidavit, and filed a
certified abstract of title to the lands
fished on reaching back to deed from
John Beard, receiver of Apalachicola
Land Co., the successors Of John Forbes
& Co.
The evidence introduced discloses that
all Of Wakulla county lying west of st.
Marks river, including the islands bor-
dering along her Gulf coast, is embraced
in what is generally known and is desig-
mated on the map of Florida and the
United States as FORBES Purchase"
Also that the locus in quo is the shallow
waters submerging the shores and low,
fiat portions Of the main land and
islands, where the tides ebb and flow,
on TIE Gulf coast Of Wakulla county,
not in navigable channels nor in any
waters that have been dedicated to the
use of navigation, or ever been declared
navigable under the navigation laws
The territory embraced in Forbes
Purchase covering an area of /, 427,-
300 l7.l0O acres and extending into
Franklin, Liberty and Gadsden counties,
as Wakulla), was acquired by Spain
from the Indian owners, who, according
TO historical traditions, extensively OBJ
Grated these fisheries as far back as to
where the mind of man runneth not to
the contrary; and Spain became vested
with the rights and privileges so long
previously enjoyed by the Indian
owners.
When Spain, for a valuable consider
alton, in lS04-06-ll, by grants from the
Spanish Crown, conveyed the territory
in question to Panton, Leslie & Co. and
to John Forbes & Co.. in their own
right and as surviving partners and
successors to Panton, Leslie & Co., it ia
but fair and reasonable to presume that
all the fishing rights, and as well as
other riparian rights, passed under such
grants from the Crown of Spain to
their grantees, John Forbes & Co. And
thus fishing rights and privileges en-
joyed by the original Indian owners of
the territory in quo passed to and be-
came vested in John Forbes & Co.
II is held in Magee VS.. Alba, 8 Fla.
1882, and in Magruder VS.. Perpall, 10 Fla.
6O2, and in Keech vs.. Enrich. % Fla,
597, that titles TO land acquired by pur-
chase from the Spanish government in
Florida, are protected by the 9Th Arti-
Gle of the treaty Of cessiOn. Hence all
the rights and privileges attaching to
lands conveyed by Spanish grants that
could have been exercised or enjoyed by
the grantees under the Spanish govern
ment, were recognized and protected
by the 9Th Article, treaty of 1919, when
hn ElnEiHau nnAa1 lac
the United States.
1t is also held in Axline VS.. Shaw, IS
Fla. sos, that lands which were private
property at the time of the passage of
the riparian act of 1856, were not af-
fected by the act. And il is held in
Ruge vs.. A. o. {. q +. Co. 25 Fla. 656.
that the act of 1856 in favor of riparian
owners did not affect land previously
dedicated to public use; that is to saw.
that vested rights cannot be affected by
subsequent legislation.
Upon these principles of law, the
free and unrestricted right of the In
dian owners to catch fish whenever they
chose TO do so, having passed by the
Spanish grants and become vested in
John Forbes 4 Co., and being private
property at the time Of the treaty of
1919. passed the change Of flags unal-
tGICu loNlllk hGNGE AT any time De-
come a part Of the public domain of the
United States nor of Florida, but re-
naming private property as il passes
on down through the channel of subse-
quent conveyances to the present own
ers unaffected by the swamp and over
flowed act and the riparian act, then
why should the fish act of lS97-99 apply
TO this private property?
Our conclusion is that the waters en-
braced in the Forbes Purchase"
which have never become the property
Of the State of Florida. nor by any
process of law dedicated to public use,
are not the waters of this State"
within the meaning of chapter 4557,
law of 1897.
And we hold that the provisions of
chapter 4557, 1897, making Il unlawful
TO catch fish "'in the waters of this
State" between certain dates therein
mentioned, do not apply TO the shallow
waters submerging the shores and low,
fiat main lands and islands, where the
tides ebb' and flow, embraced in the
Forbes Purchase.
The defendants plea in abatement is
hereby sustained.
Let the prisoner be discharged.
Ordered, Adjudged and deoreed this
November 18th, 1906.
~~~~~O~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~-~~>-