Izaak Walton was a member of the Church first and an angler second. One need only read his advice to those who wish to become master of the art of fishing to discover that first they must be comfortable in their Church. In particular he stressed being square with God, Nature and the Law. In a “Short Discourse by way of postscript, Touching the Lawes of Angling”, he gave the following advice.
“My Good Friend,
I cannot but tender my particular thanks to you, for that you have been pleased by three Editions of your Complete Angler, freely to dispence your dear-bought Experiences to all the lovers of that Art, and habe thereby so excellently vindicated the Legality thereof, as to divine approbation, that if I should go about to any more in that behalf, it indeed were to light a Candle to the Sun: But since all pleasures (though never so innocent in themselves) lose that stamp, when they are either pursued with inordinate affections, or to the prejudice of another; therefore as to the former, every man ought to endeavour, through a serious consideration of the vanity of worldly commitments, to moderate his affections thereunto, whereby they may be made of excellent use, as some poisons alleged are in Physick: And as to the latter, we are to have recourse to the known Laws, ignorance whereof excuseth no man, and therefore by their directions go to square our actions, that we hurt no man, but keep close to that golden Rule To do to all men, as we would our-selves be done unto.
Now concerning the Art of Angling, we may conclude, Sir, that as you have proved it to be of great Antiquity; so I find it favoured by the Laws of this kingdom; for where provision is made by Statutes primo Elizab. Cap. 17, against taking fish by Nets that be not of such and such a size there set down, yet, those Lawmakers had so much respect to Anglers, as to except them; and leave them at liberty to catch as big as they could, and as little as they would catch. And yet though this Apostolical Recreation would be simply in itself lawful, yet no man can go upon another mans ground to fish, without his license, but that he is a Trespasser; but if a man have license to enter into a Close or Ground for such a space of time, there though be practice Angling all that time, he is not a Trespasser, because his fishing is no abuse of his license; but this is to be understood of running Streams, and not of Ponds or standing pools; for in case of a Pond or standing Pool, the owner thereof hath a property in the fish, and they are so far said to be his, that hem may have trespass for the fish against any one that shall take them without his license, though it be upon a Common, or adjoining to the Kings High-way, or adjoining to another mans ground, who gives license: But in case of a River, where one or more have libera piscaria, only it is otherwise, for there the fishes art said to be ferae naturae, and the taking of them with an Angle to not Trespass for that no man is said to habe a property in them till he have caught them, and then it is a Trespass for any to take them from him: but this is not to be understood of fishes confined to a mans own ground by gates or otherwise, so that they can not pass away, but may be taken out or put in at pleasure, for in that case the party hah a property in them, as in the case of a standing Pool.
But where any one hath separalis piscaria, as in Child and Greenhills Case in Trin. 15, Car. 1 in the Kings Bench, there it seemeth that the fish may be said to be his, because no man else may take them whilest they are within his seberal fishing; therefore what is meant by a seberal fishing is necessary to be considered: and though the difference between a free-fishing, and Seberal fishing be often treated of in antient books of the Law, and some Opinions will have the difference to be great, and others small or nothing at all; yet the certainest definition of a serberal fishing is, where one hath the Royalty, and owneth the ground on each side of the water which agreeth with Sir William Calthrops Case, where an Action was brought by him against another for fishing in his seberal fishing, &c., to which the Defendant pleaded, that the place wherein the Trespass was supposed to be done, contained ten Perches of Land in length, and twenty Perches in breadth, which was his own Free-hold at the time when the Trespass was supposed to be done, and that he fished there as was lawful for him to do, and this was adjudged a good Plea by the whole Court, and upon argument in that very Case it was agreed, that no man could have a seberal fishing but in his own soil, and that free fishing may be in the soil of another man, which was all agreed upon by Littleton our famous English Lawyer. So that from all this may be drawn this short conclusion, That if the Angler take care that he offend not with his feet, there is no great danger of his hands.
But there are some covetous rigid persons, whose souls hold no sympathy with those of the innocent Anglers, habing either got to be Lords of Royalties, or owners of Lands adjoining to Rivers, and they do, by some opted cloyish nature and education for the purpose, insult and domineer over the innocent Angler, beating him, breaking his Rod, or at least taking if from him, and sometimes imprisoning his person as if he were a felon, Whereas a true-bred Gentleman scorns those spider-like attempts, and will rather refresh a civil stranger at his Table, than warn him from coming on his ground upon so innocent an occasion. It would therefore be considered how far such furious drivers are warranted by and what the Angler (in case of such violence) be in defense of himself. If I come upon another mans ground without his license, or the license of the Law, I am a Trespasser, for which the owner may habe a Action of Trespass against me, and if I continue there after warning to depart by the owner, or his servant there unto authored, the owner, or his servant by his command, may put me off by force, but not beat me, but in case of resistance by me for then I (by resisting) make the assault; but if he beat me, I not resisting, in that case he makes the assault and I may beat him in defence of my self, and to free my self from his violence; and in case I shall leave my Rod behind in his ground, he may take it damage feasant, but he can neither take it from my person by force, nor break it, but he is a trespasser to me: Which seems clear by the case of Reynell and Champernoon, where Reynell brought an Action of Trespass against Champernoon for taking and cutting his Nets, the Defendant justified for that he was seized to fee of a seberal fishing, and that the Plaintiff with others endeavoured to row upon his water, and with the Nets to catch his fish, and that for the safeguard of his fishing he took and cut the Nets and Dars; to which plea the Plaintiff demurred; and there it was abjudged the whole Court, that he could not by such colour cut the Nets and Dars; and judgement was thereupon given for the Plaintiff.
Doubtless our fore-fathers well considered, that man to man was a wolf, and therefore made good laws to keep us from devouring one another, and amongst the rest a very good Statute was made in the three-and-fortieth year of Queen Elizabeth, whereby it is provided, that in personal Actions in the Courts at Westminster, (being not for Land or Battery) when it shall appear to the Judges, (and be so by them signified) that the debt of damages to be recovered amount not to the sum of forty shilling or above, the said Judges shall award to the Plaintiff no more cost than damages, but less at their discretion.
And now with my acknowledgment of the advantage I habe had both by your friendship and your book; I wish nothing may ever be that looks like an alteration in the first nor any thing in the last, unless, by reason of the useful pleasure of it, you had called it the Arcadia of Angling; for it deserves the Title, and I would deserve the continuance of your friendship. “
Walton wrote the above regarding trespass on the property of others and was quite firm in addressing those who might seek to take liberties to which they had no right. If the current issue before the Episcopal Church is viewed with an understanding of the rights of ownership of the Holy Doctrine of the Church, then it is clear that Mr. Robinson and his followers are violating the property of the owner and should withdraw themselves forthwith.
As Izaak Walton would teach, the Church should invite the trespassers to the table to sup and that all should part on amiable terms. Mr. Robinson can fish in the stream of public opinion and seek approbation for his kind. He is entitled to, with his angle, catch all that are so taken. The fish in the Church’s pond are off limits to him. However, if he chooses to be a guest of the Episcopal Church, then he must abide by the license granted him.
Note: The meaning of some of the words in this piece are not known to me, and the spelling is from another time, but the message is clear.
****
Joe Wortham’s Home Page, About Joe Wortham, Directory of Web Pages
Questions? Comments? [email protected]