It is customary, in partnerships, for him who contributes the most to be entitled to the largest share of the profits; and, indeed, those who make such an arrangement transact their business justly and properly. Still, in the partnership which has reference to maritime lands, it is not equitable that the one who has the largest tract should derive more profit than he whose premises are smaller. Thus, for example, if one tract of land extends for a hundred paces along the shore, and another is of much inferior dimensions, it is in accordance with reason that each owner should be entitled to an equal share of the profits, without taking into account the size of the different tracts. Why is this? Because in other transactions of this kind, that is, in an ordinary partnership, whether money, cattle, or even real-property is placed in the common stock, what each contributes can only produce a certain revenue, but this is not the case with maritime lands, since a specified portion of such lands, considered by itself, cannot yield a separate income, as fish are not always found in the same place; and, moreover, a great extent of shore is unavailable where it is not joined to some other that is of less extent; for how can anything which is imperfect be made use of, and what advantage can be derived from it? But if this imperfection disappears when a small extent of shore is joined to a greater one, and the first renders the second useful when it could not alone yield any revenue, it is only consonant with reason that the owners should share the profits equally. Hence We enact a law which shall hereafter regulate this matter with justice; and We hereby decree that where there are maritime lands, some of which are of large dimensions and the others restricted in extent, they shall be united for the purpose of enabling nets to be stretched, and the owners of said lands shall divide the profits equally between them.