## Facts

- A rich salmon fishery existed on the River Banne in Ulster, within a navigable reach of the river about two leagues from the sea.
- The fishery was treated in governmental records as a “several” (exclusive) fishery belonging to the Crown as part of its ancient inheritance.
- For roughly two centuries, local Irish lords had taken profits from the fishery through intrusion into Crown possessions in Ulster.
- King James I granted Sir Randall Mac Donell letters patent for the territory of Rout (in County Antrim), adjoining the River Banne.
- The patent used broad terms granting, among other things, “fisheries, fishings, waters, and watercourses” within the territory.
- The patent expressly reserved to the Crown “three parts” of the fishing in the River Banne.
- The salmon fishery was also described as having been granted in fee-farm to the City of London under a separate royal grant.
- Sir Randall petitioned to be put in quiet possession of one-fourth of the fishery; the fishery was placed in sequestration pending resolution.
- The Lord Deputy of Ireland referred the matter to the chief judges for an opinion on whether any part of the royal fishery passed under Sir Randall’s patent.

## Issues

1. Whether a royal several salmon fishery in the navigable portion of the River Banne could pass under a general territorial grant that included broad words for “fisheries” and “waters.”
2. Whether the Crown’s historic treatment of the fishery as a distinct prerogative asset prevented its transfer by implication.
3. Whether an express reservation of three-fourths of the fishery in the patent foreclosed Sir Randall’s claim to any share.

## Decision

- The judges resolved that no part of the royal salmon fishery passed to Sir Randall under his letters patent.
- The fishery remained with the Crown and consistent with the Crown’s prior dispositions to its grantees.
- Broad, general grant language was held insufficient to convey a royal several fishery in a navigable river.
- The express reservation in the patent was given controlling effect against any inference that the grant included the fishery.

## Legal Principles

- Navigable rivers are subject to public rights of use and fishing in general, but the Crown may hold and grant a several (exclusive) fishery as a distinct proprietary interest.
- Where a fishery is shown by longstanding records to be a separate royal asset, it is not treated as an incident that automatically follows adjacent land.
- Royal grants are construed strictly against the grantee; general words do not transfer special prerogative interests unless clearly and particularly expressed.
- Express reservations in a patent are enforced according to their terms and constrain the scope of any otherwise broad grant language.

## Conclusion

The judges concluded that Sir Randall’s territorial patent did not convey any portion of the Crown’s several salmon fishery in the navigable River Banne because the fishery was a distinct royal prerogative interest supported by historical records and, in any event, was protected by an express reservation in the patent.


The Case of the Royal Fishery of Banne, 80 Eng. Rep. 540 (K.B. 1611)