AUTHORITIES UPON DETERMINATION OF LIMIT BETWEEN “ RIVER” AND “SEA.”
No. 1019. C
THE TWEE GEBROEDERS, 3 C. ROBB 336, 341, 342, PER SIR W. SCOTT (LORD STOWELL).
Vide Vol. V, page 2093.
No. 1020. C
DUKE OF GORDON v. EARL OF MURRAY (MORAY).
15 MORISON'S DICTIONARY OF DECISIONS, 12797.
* * * *
In this case a judgment of the House of Peers betwixt the Duke of Gordon and Earl of Murray was cited, but was found to be a different case (See APPENDIX.) The Duke of Gordon had a salmon-fishing in ostio fluminis de Spey. The Earl of Murray had the superior fishing of this river ; and the question was, to ascertain the proper limits of these respective fishings. It was the opinion of the Court, that the ostium fluminis is that precise point where the river runs into the sea, at whatever time of the tide ; and, there-fore, that the ostium fluminis is a variable point, sometimes higher and some-times lower, according as the sea approaches or recedes from the land. The House of Peers were of a different opinion. They interpreted a grant of a salmon-fishing in ostio fluminis more benignly. They judged the ostium fluminis not to be confined to a point, but to comprehend the whole space betwixt the lowest ebb and the highest flood-mark ; and thereby to be an immoveable space instead of a moveable point. Therefore it was adjudged, “That the Earl of Murray has the exclusive right of fishing in the river Spey, downward to the place where the line which the sea makes upon the coast cuts the river at high water ; and that he has no right to fish beyond that line : That the appellant the Duke of Gordon has the exclusive right of fishing from and below the said line to the sea ; and that he has no right to fish above that line.” Hence it appears that the point in that case was to determine betwixt two parties, having both right to fish in the same river, but in different places.
* * * *