## Facts

- Benjamin Barker owned a seaside farm bounded by the ocean; a portion of shoreline had been conveyed to the United States, but Barker retained the adjoining upland and beach area relevant to the dispute.
- A stick of ship’s timber came ashore after apparently being washed from, or jettisoned by, a vessel at sea; no true owner appeared to claim it.
- Defendants (Simeon Bates and others) first located the timber on rocks at low-water mark, marked it, and attempted to remove it but were prevented by sea conditions.
- The timber was later thrown onto the beach below and adjoining Barker’s land.
- Defendants entered onto the beach without Barker’s permission, took the timber, and converted it to their own use.
- Barker sued in trespass for entry onto his close and for taking the chattel; the trial court awarded Barker $15 in damages.
- Defendants appealed, asserting a superior right as finders; neither side claimed title other than by possession.

## Issues

1. Whether, as between a shorefront landowner and finders who entered without permission, the landowner had the superior right to possess timber cast upon the beach adjoining his land.
2. Whether defendants could rely on a finder’s possessory claim to defeat liability when the taking occurred during an unauthorized entry onto the plaintiff’s property.
3. Whether the timber’s movement from low-water mark to the adjoining beach affected the plaintiff’s constructive possession and right to recover for its taking.

## Decision

- The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts affirmed the judgment for Barker.
- The court held that Barker, as landowner, had the superior right of possession to the timber once it was on the beach adjoining his land.
- The court rejected defendants’ attempt to assert finder’s rights based on a taking accomplished through trespass.
- The $15 damages award was left undisturbed.

## Legal Principles

- When neither party can prove true ownership, the dispute is resolved by relative rights of possession.
- A landowner is treated as having constructive possession of goods lying on, or cast upon, the land within the owner’s right of exclusive occupation.
- A finder’s possessory interest, though generally good against others except the true owner, is subordinate to the landowner’s constructive possession when the finding and taking are accomplished by trespass.
- A party may not improve its claim to possession by committing a wrongful entry onto another’s land to seize the chattel.

## Conclusion

The court held that a shorefront landowner’s constructive possession of items driven onto the beach adjoining his land prevails over the claim of trespassing finders, and it affirmed damages for the unauthorized entry and removal of the timber.


Barker v. Bates, 30 Mass. (13 Pick.) 255 (1832)