The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1891-09-22
The Rape of the ooast Of Georgia.

GENTLEMEN-Sincerely confiding in the
rood sense and honest purpose of the mem
hers of the general assembly of Georgia to do
ipstice to all persons and all interests in the
state. when the same have been intelligentlv
presented to you for your consideration, /
RESPECTFULLY present to you this memorial,
hnIpbly claiming TO exhibit to you the inju-
rious effects of legislation heretofore en-
acted by the general assembly in relation to
oyster culture, and making such suggestions
as appear to me just and proper in relation
thereto.
law as to riparian rights the title of land
owners on opposite sides Of a stream extend
70 the middle OF the stream; nor would it
seem necessary TO call your further atten-
ZION to the law of title affecting marsh
lands, or accretions to the high lands,
designating such marsh lands or aocretions
as belonging to the highlands to which they
are accretions. The recent attempt of in
corporated oyster companies 60 grab prac-
tically the entire oyster producing regions
of the state renders it emnently proper
that should recall to your memory these
existing statutes concerning title which
have been SO gravely overlooked in
oyster legislation heretofore enacted and
which would eliminate in still graver con-
iscatory legislation under the bill intro
duced by Representative Ryals OF this
county for the sale of what he is pleased to
call the public marshes.
In the interior of Georgia farmer can
plant bis fruit trees and crops all along his
lines and no one pretends to question his
title thereto. On the coast, however, where
most of a farmers lines are water lines,
where oysters grow, the oyster gatherer
looked with longing eyes on this product of
the coast farmers soil (which unquestion-
ably extends to low water mark and calcu-
lated that if he could only get the
legislature OF Georgia to come to his
assistance and make such laws as would
permit the oyster gatherer to take, under
color of law, these perquisites and products
of the coast farmers water lines, he, the
oyster gatherer, could enrich himself by
denuding the coast farmer of his oysters,
and the unfortunate coast farmer couldn't
stop him. And 80 we had the earlier rob-
berry of the coast land owner by statutes
which limited the land owner to the use Of
oulv 800 feet Of his water frontage and
permitted the oyster pirate to rob the bal
once, even though there we're ten or twenty
miles of such frontage.
ask you, gentlemen, in all conscience,
whether it would not have been more
humane and wise to have permitted the
land owner Of these salt water lines to us3
his entire frontage for oyster culture, so
that he could employ his poorer white and
colored native neighbors and thereby en-
rich both himself and these neighbors' But
the oYstermen say, mo that would inter
fere with our (their) right to go and freely
pirate upon the lines of the land ownerw
And am sorry to say that all legislation
heretofore enacted encourages such brig
gandage, and brushes the land owner aud
only real permanent taxpayer of the coast
But the oyster Drigands, whether corporate
Or individual. went up on a hig3 noun
tainn and took a look into what was left for
the unfortunate land owner; and when they
had ''spied out the land ;" they were not
content with letting the land owner retain
even his 500 feet, and his creeks that led
up into the marshes; so they held a con-
clave, and shutf1ed new tricks to get what
was left; and so we had the oyster bill of
1889, which not only forbid the land owner
the use of his frontage, but actually took it
away and gave it to the monopoly oyster
companies who did not own one foot
Of the land. Several alarming re-
suts have followed this measure.
Formerly our poor native oystermen
made their living in part by the piracy of
these frontages of over 800 feet; but now
these lines are being taken up in the name
OF stockholders" of these monopoly com
panies-men who plant no oysterS-and
whilst the land owner is as mercilessly
robbed as before, if not more so, the giant
companies do the robbing. and neither the
land owner nor the native oysterman of the
coast is permitted to open his mouth in his
own defense.
The so-called five-acre privileges were a
contemplated fraud perpetrated on the ill
informed members of your body, with
full knowledge that the oyster companies
expected to obtain en- assignment of these
hVe-acre leaseholds, or privileges, to the
companies themselves. So much is this
true that the Ryals oyster bill, recently
enacted by you, provides validating
clause for this very fraud perpetrnted upon
you.
Again, the five~acre leaseholds, taking up
the water lines within 100 feet of low water
mark (the pretended title line of the land
owner, as designated by the oystermen who
has denuded him of his riparian rights,
locate these strangers, who own not foot
Oh the soil and pay no taxes whatever, ell
along the land owners water tfence) line,
ana at the mouth OF every oyster-bearing
creek belonging to such land owner, and as
result these oystermen appropriate Il will
not say steaD all the oysters above low
water mark and in the creeks, In both Of
SIlch locations the oysters unquestionably
belong to the person whose title covers the
ground; shat is, the land owner himself.
but how Is the land owner to protect his
property from such appropriation You
nave passed laws placing him practically in
the absolute power of these oyster-getters,
and at their instance you are expected not
only to continue to legalizs this
pIundering arrangement. but to
go further and actually confscate any
property rights of the land owners of the
coast which the yorecious oyster COM
panies deem necessary for their
own prosperity, even though the
best interests of the coast
be wrecked by the process. Permit me to
explain some OF these measures The ''ovs>
ter commission" recommend that the natural
oyster beds designated in brakes survey be
made free forever. AS many Of these beds
are on hnes above low water mark and are
PROFESSIONALLY covered by the titles Of the
land oWness, respectfully ask your author
Ivy, under the constitution of the state, TO
Jake theSe private properties away from
ther owners without just compensation, or
70 take them at ALT the purpose of trans
Ierrlng them without the owners consent
70 tue oyster monopolies, or any other
parties!
But here comes in Mai. RyaIs' second
trump card for the Oemler OYSTER Com
pany, and other similar erabbers. in the
form OF Ryals' marsh land bill for the sale
OF The salt marshes 1t is pretended that
TINS bill is only to cover few thousand
acres OF purely public marshes, which bv
y" ~. construction OF the statutes affecting
accretlons to the highlands" could be con-
fsG iIl as such accretions; and that no con-
.n.;S could occur as to the land owners
IT'ie 10 SUCH "accretions to the highlands"
am am sorry to have to believe that this pre-
Gus, ,aa is fraud, since Maj. Ryals stated to
&C III person that sin his opinion the