Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1860-05-03

employ the time of the House in enacting law,
every substantive provision of which already
listed upon the statute book.
The law in reference to orr spring fisheries
seems to have been passed at the session Of 1854
and no doubt it was the intention of its trainers
to make it as effective as they could in the pro-
lection of the interests of the 'tseine fishermen
and the owners of fishing shores. How far the
law accomp1ishcs that object shall not stop to
enquire But shall endcavor to prove that it
can not be said to be oppressively severe upon
those of our fellow citizens who are engaged in
drifting gill-nets. What then are the provisions
of the law of 1854, defining the rights of seine
hauers and OILERS and what notifications were
made in them by the late law? LIST. The act OF
1854 prescrbcs the times in which seine haul
ing and ging shall be carried on and fixes it
from the 1st of March to the 25th Of May
Pad. 1t provides that no gill-net shall be drift
e Il in the berth of any seine actually hauIcd.-
3rfl. III a. no seine or g-net shall, under a
penalty of $50 in each case. Except those winch
are laid out from ami hauled to the shore.) be
fshcd within the time prescribed as the lshlng
season. but this latter provision is not to apply
to the Iona fae citizens of any county bordering
npon the river, but that such citizens are to be
allowed to fish as they had heretofore been i'll
:. the habit Of doing.
The above will be found the substantial pro-
visions of the act of 1854. Now as to the mo-
dificatons made by the late act: LIST. The pc
Rod Of the fishing season is extended from the
25th Of May to the LIST Of June. End. Glll-nets
are prohibited being drilted not only within the
haul but opposite the shore where any seine is
actually operated Ord. The proviso of the act
Of 1854 is changed so as to restrict the right to
fish gill-nets to those bona 1ide citizens of the
county who own or occupy shores Now these
are the sole changes made in the law by the late
enactment. Are they justly amenabe to the
Severe criticisms of "Pomonkey?" Do. they
heartlessly and cruelty Cypress the OILERS? |
am sure such will not be the verdict OF public
sentiment In what provision Of this law does
"Pomonkey" find those evidences of aristocratc
influences, under the operation of which this law
bad it's being Is it that which seeks to confnc
the right to fish to our own citizens? No; for
, he says the exclusion of non-restlents is all
right. Is it then the provision which requires
our citizens who may desire to carry on this
business either to own or rent shores? In reply
to this | must say that even this requirement
| cannot work oppression to the giller, because
his own necessities require him to have fish
house Tor shanty) on shore, whittier he can re-
tire in bad weather for the purpose of rest and
, refreshment, ETC., etc. Then Mr. Editor, is il
the remaining provision, which prohibits gillers
drifting their nets within the berth or opposite
the shore where any seine is actually beins
hauled? l hardly think this can be construed
to work grievous oppression. For s'Pomonkey'
f should remember that OILERS are not the only
parties having interest in the fisheries, but tina
f there are two other numerous casses-the seine
, fishermen and the owners of fishing shores
+ whose interests should not be overlooked anc
= 81
ramount, to those of the OILERS, for the reason
that the State cxacts and receives from then
! large amounts in the shape of taxes. On thu
e contrary, so far as am advised, but little, i
' anything, is received from the OILERS.
+ One word only, Mr.. Editor in reference to tn
lamentations of ''Pomonkey" SO profusely utter
ed in behalf of the free persons of color engaged
in giing. and the heinous sin committed by tn
; Legislature in withholding from them the RICH
r to prosecute this calling, thereby redueiag then
Is r. hs re fahsat 7hs s&ae
a have the right to drift gil-nets as Thave yet t
learn that this is the only avenue he has to hon
e est employment. His labor expended upon tn
farm of some neigbborng farmer would benefi
- the farmer and give him the means of living
r without resorting to dishonest practices So
: cannot but regard much Of ''Pomonkey's" sym
. Pet'ho uIlopcfG. DuG Ue tIllS dS IL may, all
' claim is that the late Democratic Legislature i
not alone responsible, but can only be held tt
answer for its moiety in these acts of oppressio,
f with the Legislature of "a, and possibly will
: the Judges Of the Supreme Court of e. S. ii
4 their celebrated decision in the bred Scott case
e where it is he'll that negro cannot be citizen
For it is plain that if the proviso in the late ac
(which is literal copy of that of '54) does not
give free negroes the right to drift ll-nets. nei
Their would that Of "a if it were III force the late
5 act in this respect leaving them just W e il
found them.
Hoping have been able to explain somewhat
the provisions Of this so-much-comp laned-o
law, and at least to demonstrate that the late
5 Legislature is not so culpable as ''Pomonkey
, would seem to think, I will conclude by return
ing you my thanks for your time and space
which perhaps have SO unpro6tably occupied
ONE OF THE LATE DELEGATES.