Morning journal and courier., 1883-04-25
Communicated


 It is fitting to return one courtesy with an other, and fair to give the advocates of measure chance to be heard; but MT. De- lano did neither when he moved the previous question in the House of Representatives, last Friday, on the bill for numbering oys- ter vessels Two amendments, which would improve it, were adopted by the advocacy of those who appreciate the importance of the bill and when the question re-curred on the bill as amended, Messrs. Bell Griswold and Delano spoke against 1t, and MT. Delano at the close of his speech moved the previous question, thus preventing any correction of misstatements and irrelevant arguments.
 But what made the matter more noticeable was that MT. Delano had previously asked and obtained unanimous consent that Mir. Bell should be given more time after having exhausted it under the rule and the very. mo ment while he moved the previous question MT. Law WAS on his feet to move that Mir. Delano's time also should be extended.
 Perhaps the only way to prevent the pas sage of the bill WAS to cut of it's advocates from pointing out the irrelevancy of the argu- ments against it and the great importance of the bill, but probably almost any bill, no matter how notorious, would be killed if only it's opponents were to be heard.
 Among other misstatements 1t was said that no Fairfield county oyster growers fa- vored the bill before the committee, and then in reply to question the chairman said he believed one or two men who owned ground in Fairfield county favored it. The fact was that eight oyster growers who both own ground and reside in Fairfield county ad- vocated it before the committee, and five more who reside in New Haven county but cultivate ground in Fairfield county. Most of the argument (?) against the bill was appeal to the feelings of the House in behalf ,f khn Gk-nak ,ho,a beds" and against ia monopoly" This bill is designed solely to de- crease the stealing of oysters, and what hurt it can do the 'tpoor man" or the natural beds,' or how it can assist a mo nopely," to prevent theft common sense saith not. But is it right to appeal falsely to the sympathies of legislators in order to gratify the constituencies of two or three members of the House against the unanimous opinion of all the other oyster growers of the State, the shell fish commissioners, the ma jority of the Committee on Fisheries and the Senate :? One of the opponents of the bill appreciated the situation when he remarked with much eemplacency after the adjourn ment: 'Just get up and talk about the poor man. or the widows and orphans who own railroad stocks, and you are sure to win.''
 The reasons for this bill are simple and strong. The oyster beds are three and four miles from land; hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of oysters are cultivated on the bottom as grain is raised on land Tens of thousands of bushels are stolen annually; nineteen-twentieths of the oyster growers be-. ieve that this bill will largely reduce the amount stolen. It's opponents say '4hey steal nights" Yes, and days too. Because it is difficult to watch them nights shall we make no effort to pre- vent it days And no person of common sense can deny that this law would lessen day stealing. It can hurt none but thieves s,o k~ia 11f S5o o,-o of1r IoJTo represented 25 cents to 8 notary, three cents postage and 50 cents license, and it is done for as long as the boat lasts, thirty or forty years. Those who appeared to oppose the bill before the committee do not own one one hundredth of the ground in the exclusive jurisdiction of the State, as sworn to in the tax lists rendered to the commissioners of shell fisheries. Nearly all of the enterpris- ing and progressive growers of the State ask this simple and proper protection.