6 Marine and Coastal Law matter in dispute is local in its character, and the controversy concerns only fixed property, within the limits of New Jersey, the decision of her tribunals ought to settle the construc- tion of the charter and that the courts of the United States are bound to follow it. It may, however, be doubted, whether this case falls within the rule, in relation to the judgments of state courts when expounding their own consti- tution and laws. The question here depends, not upon the meaning of instruments framed by the people of New Jersey, or by their authority, but upon char- ters granted by the British crown under which certain rights are claimed by the state, on the one hand, and by private individuals on the other. And if this court had been of opinion, that upon the face of these letters-patent, the question was clearly against the state, and that the proprietors had been derived at their just rights, by the erro- neous judgment of the state court it would, per- haps, be difficult to maintain, that this decision, of itself, bound the conscience of this court. It is, however, unquestionably, entitled to great weight. It confirms the construction uniformly placed on these charters and instruments, by the other public authorities and in which the pro- prietors had so long acquiesced. Public acts and laws, both of the colonial and state governments, have been founded upon this interpretation and extensive and valuable improvements made under it. In the case referred to, the sanction of the judicial authority of the state is given to it. And if the words of the letters-patent had been far more doubtful than they are, this decision, made upon such a question, with great delibera- tion and research, ought, in our judgment, to be regarded as conclusive. Independently, however, of this decision of the supreme court of New Jersey, we are of opinion that the proprietors are not entitled to the rights in question and the judgment of the Circuit Court must, therefore, be reversed. Questions 1. According to the U.S. Supreme Court, how does the State of New Jersey’s ownership of submerged lands differ from a citizen’s right to own private property ashore? 2. What responsibility does the state have in man- aging its commonly held fishery resources? 3. What legal basis did the U.S. Supreme Court have for overruling the New Jersey Supreme Court? 4. Why, after the American Revolution severed all legal ties, did the U.S. Supreme Court devote so much attention to English common law? Shively v. Bowlby, 152 U.S. 1 (1894) Mr. Justice Gray delivered the opinion of the Court. . . . In the case at bar, the lands in controversy are below high water mark of the Columbia River where the tide ebbs and flows and the plain- tiff in error claims them by a deed from John M. Shively, who, while Oregon was a Territory, obtained from the United States a donation claim, bounded by the Columbia River, at the place in question. The defendants in error claim title to the lands in controversy by deeds executed in behalf of the State of Oregon, by a board of commissioners, pursuant to a statute of the State of 1872, as amended by a statute of 1874, which recited that the annual encroachments of the sea upon the land, washing away the shores and shoaling har- bors, could be prevented only at great expense by occupying and placing improvements upon the tide and overflowed lands belonging to the State, and that it was desirable to offer facilities and encouragement to the owners of the soil abutting on such harbors to make such improve- ments and therefore enacted that the owner of any land abutting or fronting upon, or bounded by the shore of any tide waters, should have the right to purchase the lands belonging to the State in front thereof and that, if he should not do so within three years from the date of the act, they should be open to purchase by any other person who was a citizen and resident of Ore- gon, after giving notice and opportunity to the owner of the adjoining upland to purchase and made provisions for securing to persons who had actually made improvements upon tide lands a priority of right so to purchase them.
Previous Page Next Page