OCR Text |
Show 211 quoting this language of Chief Justice Shaw , the Court says , , at page 439-40 of the ( Woods IVoods ) case : ( "But But ) this language is applied to the capacity of the stream , and is not intended to be a strict ( enumera enumera- enumera ) tion of the uses to which . it must be actually applied in order to give it this character . Navigable ( streams streans ) are highways ; and a traveller for pleasure is as fully entitled to protection in using a public way , whether by land or by water , as a traveller for business . Certainly fishing and fowling are as ( really- really really ) regarded , on navigable waters , as trade and ( agricul agricul- agricul ) ture , though not mentioned in the case cited above ; and in West Roxbury v . Stoddard , 7 Allen , 158 , 171 , it is said that the use of great ponds , which are public property , may as well be for ( bathing" bathing bathing ) , boating , skating , , fishing and fowling , as for business , and is entitled to equal consideration . If water is navigable for pleasure boating , it must be regarded as navigable ( water Nvater ) , though no craft has ever been upon it for the purposes of trade or agriculture . The purpose of the navigation is not the subject of inquiry , but the fact of the capacity of the water for use in ( navigation mvigation ) . " We have read no decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that is not in complete harmony with the last quoted language of the Massachusetts Court . We also contend that none of the decisions of lesser federal courts cited and relied upon by Complainant , when read in the light of the facts there before those courts , can properly be construed to be in conflict with said statement of the Massachussetts Court in the Woods case . If the language of Chief Justice Marshall , in ( Cohens Cohem ) V . Virginia , is kept in mind , little ( diffi- diffi ) culty will be encountered in interpreting any of the federal decisions that are pertinent in the case at bar . In ( Economy Econo-my Economy ) Light & Power Co . v . United States , 256 Fed . 792 ( 7th C . C . A . ) , a more complete statement of the facts is found than in the Supreme Court decision . In its bill of complaint the United States alleged that defendant had , without the consent of Congress and without authority of the Illinois Legislature , commenced the construction of a dam irl the Desplaines River at a point in Grundy County , Illinois ; that said river at said point was navigable water of the ( United T-Tnited TTnited ) States ; an injunction restraining further ( ob- ob ) |