Tyler vs. Wilkinson Essay ⋆ Environment Essay Examples ⋆ EssayEmpire

This Tyler vs. Wilkinson Essay example is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need a custom essay or research paper on this topic, please use our writing services. EssayEmpire.com offers reliable custom essay writing services that can help you to receive high grades and impress your professors with the quality of each essay or research paper you hand in.

Ebenezer Tyler vs . Abraham Wilkinson was a court case decided in 1826 that continues to have important implications for the management of water resources in the United States. The case is also widely known as the Sargent’s Trench Trial, as this was the name of the stretch of water above the water wheel over which the case was fought.

Tyler versus Wilkinson centers on the ownership of riverine water resources and the legal power to use them when they act as a finite resource. During the 19th century, water wheels had become an important source of power and were employed both in family farms and, increasingly, in larger-scale industrial enterprises. Development had already had a negative impact on the Sargent’s Trench as it had previously been so blocked by construction waste as to obstruct the migration of fish traveling upstream to spawn. Even so, economic growth in the period meant that more people were attempting to draw power from the rivers and pressure was being placed on the extant legal regulations. Because access to such power also had numerous implications for economic and social opportunities, the precedent drawn in this case had significance for the whole country. However, it was also rooted in specific local circumstances and antagonism among the protagonists and among various coalitions of local interests. By exploring whether water resources should be made freely available to all or whether certain individuals or organizations should have privileged access, Judge Story was in part helping to determine the fate of traditional users of the river-fishers, farmers, and urban residents dependent on fresh river water for hygiene and sustenance. His decision was to allocate water resources among either upstream or downstream users and any excess or surplus. Only the surplus water resources could be sequestered by any subsequent claim to use of resources, although this principle was modified by the presence of any pre-existing claims or usages of the water, which were in turn to be reevaluated.

The consequence is that no individual was to be considered in possession of a permanent or inalienable right to water that would deny the use of that water to any other person. Such a principle has underlined a great deal of legal attitude toward the environment and its management in the United States.

Recognizing public interest in this case, Judge Story made sure the facts of the case and of his decision entered into the public domain. He wrote the decision for the newspapers personally to avoid possible distortion or bias by reporters or other intermediaries. The precedent came to be widely regarded and followed.

Bibliography:

Opinion Pronounced by the Hon. Judge Story in the Case of Ebenezer Tyler and Others vs. Abraham Wilkinson and Others: at the Last June Term of the Circuit Court, for the Rhode-Island District (Randall Meacham, 1827).