Packard v. Ryder

11 N.E. 578, 144 Mass. 440, 1887 Mass. LEXIS 207
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided May 9, 1887·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Holmes, J.

It is now well settled that there is a public right to take shell-fish on the shore and flats below high-watermark and within one hundred rods of the upland, until the flats are enclosed by the proprietors. Weston v. Sampson, 8 Cush. 347. Dunham v. Lamphere, 3 Gray, 268, 271. Lakeman v. Burnham, 7 Gray, 437. 9 Gray, 526, 527. Commonwealth v. Bailey, 13 Allen, 541, 542. Proctor v. Wells, 103 Mass. 216. Commonwealth v. Manimon, 136 Mass. 456, 458. But the right to take shell-fish is asserted on the single ground that the general right of fishing extends to and includes it. Weston v. Sampson, and Lakeman v. Burnham, ubi supra. The cases cited show too plainly for further discussion, that, if .there is a right to go upon flats and to disturb the soil for clams, a fortiori there is a right to pass over them for fishing, in the stricter sense of the word. The defendant did not set nets, or create any permanent obstruction, as in Duncan v. Sylvester, 24 Maine, 482.

Exceptions sustained.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Packard v. Ryder, 11 N.E. 578, 144 Mass. 440, 1887 Mass. LEXIS 207 (Mass. 1887).

11 N.E. 578 (Packard v. Ryder) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pazolt v. Director of the Division of Marine Fisheries
631 N.E.2d 547 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1994)
Barry v. Grela
361 N.E.2d 1251 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1977)
Howes v. Town of Barnstable
189 N.E. 34 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1934)
Allen v. Allen
30 L.R.A. 497 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1895)
State v. Black River Phosphate Co.
32 Fla. 82 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1893)