The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1876-03-22
WEDNESDAY NOR INe.' MARCH y. 1876.
&c ATTACK ON THE OYsrEa aFUNuUH-LErTER
oYsTHE ATToRKEY.G GEHERAI.--Thg following
10 the letter Of the AttotneY.G General which
was transmitted to the General Assembly BY
CoM1oNwKLLTH OF V,RGINIA D,
q ATToRHEY: :GEHERAL'a OPF1cg,
RICHH0ND, March is, 1875.

Hon. James g. KempeT, GouernoT OF Psr'
gfnid: 81 i. t
z ssIr,I beg leave to cali your attention to
The attempts now in progress 70. annul BY
the agency OF the courts Of the United States
the laws OF the State passed TO protect her
oyster fisheries from depreciation by non.
residents. Z; {; ,ss 5lsz
One McCready, q nonresident Of the State,
has been engaged extensively for several
years In planting oysters In the waters OF
Gloucester county on an aYowed claim 9of
right. He was convicted Of the offence by
the judgment OF the Circuit Court Of that
countyy aud on appeal the Judgment was re-
Gently affirmed by the Court OF Appeals. He
has carried the judgment OF afaitmance TO the
Supreme Court Of the United states for re-
view. His pretension is, that the law Of the
State which secures to her citizens the right
OF fishing In her own waters, TO the exclu-
sion Of non. residents, Is in violation OF the
provision In the Constitution Of the United
States set that the citizens OF each State; shall
|be entitled to all privileges and immunities
Of citizens In the several Stafes.', 80
The same peIsonwss not long since arrest
ed on Indictment for like offence, but pro-
cured his release on habeds corpus, by the
Judgment! OF Judge Bond, Of the Circuit
Court of the United States, that the law
under which he was prosecuted is unconsti-
tutional and void. And he has procured
from the same Judge an order of injunction
on bill and equity, which restrains citizen
Of Virginia from planting oysters Ia North
river, on q location agreed upon between the
citizen and the State Inspector, upon the as
sumption Of precedent rights acquired By
himself in the same locality, without regard
to the inspectors authority or the law of:the
State. This suit is now pending.
It may not be amiss to add that in case
decided In the Supreme Court of the United
States (smitt Us. State of Maryland, 18th
Howard, 71), where the validity Of such
protective, laws was examined, the Court
thought the question Of their validity was
not fairly presented on the record; but il
used this language =" Whether this liberty
(of fishing) belongs exclusively TO the citi
zens of the State OF Maryland, or may law
fully be enjoyed in common by all ths
citizens of the United States; whether thi:
public use may be restricted by the
State to,its. own citizens or a part of them
or. BY force of the Constitution of tn,
United States, must remain common to al
citizens of the United States; whether tn,
National Government, by treaty or act o
Congress; can grant to foreigners the rjgh
to participate therein, or what in general ar
the trusts upon which the State holds thi
soil, or its power to define and construe tina
trust, are matters wholly beyond the scop
of this case, and upon which We give nj
opinion" That the purpose is to triDs
these questions again under review canno
be doubted. Very respectfully,
= -'t u r, II, DANIEL.