The daily progressive-miner., 1916-06-08
IMPORTANT OPINIONS ON FIShTRAP CASES PRIOR OCCUPANT OF LOCATION IS CONSIDERED ENTITLED
 TO POSSESSION
lIuneau Empire. May 6l

In three opinions read this morn ing by Judge Robert W. Jennings, one for himself. and two for Judge F. NJ. Brown. it was held that neither permits from the War Department to construct fish traps, nor Territorial license giving permission to operate fish traps. conveyed title to fish trap sites and that under the law no pro visions are made for the location of fish trap sites.
 In one case it was contended that the local custom of the fishermen and operating con panies Of posting notices on the shore would hold site. This was held not to be so un- der the law. and the three decisions are unanimous in declaring that ac- tual prior possession can be the only question considered in controversies over tine title Of trap sites.
 Thlinket Case
 The first opinion rendered was in the case of the Thlinket Packing Company. vs. fhe p. E. Harris Com pany. in dispute over the title to trap site in Ground Hog Bay. Icy Straits. The plaintiff company ap- piled for and obtained temporary in- junction against the defendant re- straining it from completing their trap. on which they were working
 The plaintiff company then contin- ued to drive their trap. and 3 counter complaint was filed by the Harris Company. alleging prior possession, and that the trap of the Thlinket Company would cork the trap.
 Trap Direction Changed
 h his finding under the evidence, Judge Jennings found that the Thin ket Packing Company. since the start of the suit had changed the direction of the trap and that it did not cork the trap Of the Harris Company. He also held that the Harris Company was in nprioractuaIp possession Of the site and that the permit from the war de partment was merely issued to guard aganist the obstruction of navigable waters. It was also held that the li- cense issued by the Territory was merely for the purpose Of levying tax on the actual operation of a trap and that no application for a license need be made until after a trap had been actually constructed. and that neither the permit or the lisence con yeyed title to the site. The injun- ction is to be dismissed with neither side to recover costs, according to the opinion. Both sides are left just where they were at the beginning Of litigation
 Will Appeal Case
 The opposing attorneys in this case wiIl file their findings in the matter tomorrow morning and the final decis- ion will then be rendered. Judge John R. Vim. for the plaintiff. said today that in order to test the law and settle the question. an appeal will be made 10 the Circuit Court.
 Ketehikan Case Decided
 The opinion Iii the case Of the Pure Food Fish Company vs. he Anacortes Fish Company. a dispute over the title to 9 fish trap on Gravina Island near Ketchikan, Judge Brown held the same as Judge Jennings and the temporary injunction was dismissed The defendants. who are in actual possession Of the property and whose trap is nearly completed are entitled 10 remain.
 The other opinion handed down by Judge Brown was in the case Of the Northwest Fisheries Company vs. Spencer yanZandt, and as the plani- tiff are in actual possession with a trap nearly completed, they will be allowed TO retain possession.
 so7I T-