Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-12-11
The oyster Question.

To The IsillDl VI AitN irAti''t'r'''
The letter OF Mr.. William Ellenger' APP
nearing in your issue OF the sth' calls
nm IN. ouestio vexata OF Virginia legis-
latiop. and Virginia politics, as we'll
the oyster question. Perhaps TINS qutS-
ton has never appealed with more III
rerest 10 the wisdom and conservatism
or our legislative body No one can
lust now say how far and fast the STATE
NAV be drifting towards pohlicdl CIT
sis. and our wise Solons may a. wei ac-
cept the fact that the current leSisld-
live record may not only affect the pres
ent welfare Of the state. but largely
determine the future political results.
fl il the misfortune OF oyster legisla-
tion 10 be dominated by Two opposite
and contending theories-that OF mere To-
cal interest and that OF certain posi-
tive. but crude notions, relating To the
matter OF state revenue Both theories
are equally faulty, and equally dangerous.
A. A logical outcome Of inns iacuOnal
fight. the result not only proves unsatis-
factory from a practical point OF view
but there il being engendered certain
feeling Of distrust and apprehension that
may eventually threaten 10 become a po-
litical factor in the state.
As an actual matter of fact. it Is not
a
must involve the mere matter OF
state revenue. with possible incidental
protection Of the FISHERMAN, nor the
mere protection Of the FISHERMAN with
incidental revenue to the State. \ fair
business view Of the situation would
show that thes. results are mutually inter-
dependent that a line Of legislative poll
cy. wisely conserving the best interests
of the industry. could be safely trust
ed 10 Weld most revenue. and that
conversely. a system OF legislation that
would embarrass and discourage the oys-
terman would correspcndingly dwarf the
revenue. To properly accept this fact Is
TO half solve the problem.
II Is equally plain that, in legislating
on the oyster question. the interests Of
the separate and distinct classes Of oyster
men must be duly considered. 1t will
not do to accept the dictum OF the
planter alone. or the tonger. or the
dredcer In spite Of a certain communi-
" Of interest. there still remains a
conflict of class individuality. irrecon-
cliabe by common provision. II. there
fore. requires a practical knowledge of
these details TO meet the situation sue
cesSfully.
From the standpoint OF a Tidewatcr rep
resentativc. the present writer does not
hesitate TO cOncede, on behalf OF the oys-
.ermen the state equity Of a revenue.
This claim Of the State is no longer a
question In any section Of the oyster coun-
try. The only remaining difficulty lies
in the proper adjustment of this theo-
~ TO the actual condition of the in
dustry: and the equalizing Of the re-
spective rights between the three sepa-
rate cldsses-thc tonger, the dredgcr, and
the planter Manifestly. to attmpt thie
task on mere theoretical lines. and only
with an eye TO revenue. Is not only to
invite the chances OF defeat. but TO metc
out serious injustice 10 q large section
Of the State.
In an official paper, coming under
the eye Of the writer two years ago
the proposition was gravely stated that
the meadow-land on the ocean-side Of the
Eastern Shore should be appraised as the
deal planting ground of the State. As a
matter OF fact. these lands are above
high-water mark, and are only reached
By saltwater at the rare intervals of
storm-tides. Yet. these areas were con-
adently embraced under the catching
phrase-"a million of acres and a million
of dollars" 1t is easy TO understand
how such enthusiastic suggestions excite
distrust and even contempt. In the mind
of the practical FISHERMAN. rather than
confidence IN tne NlSuOin OF an OIL
cial. Legislation enacted on the basis
OF such ill-advised theories is unfortunate,
as tending 10 inspire suspicion OF what
ever else may be salufary In the law.
II. therefore. the oyster question Is a
practical business question, II should be
accepted on business principles. Our le-
gisiaiors should not only acquaint them
selves with the subject. but essay to
subordinate popular theories TO actual
conditions. Unfortunately, IL is not easy
to do this through the provisions of our
present State machinery. fractional dis
cussions tend rather 10 hide than reveal
the true merits of the question. There l.
no authoritative channel through which
the General Assembly may scquaint itself
officially with the needs OF the situation
no agency IL may hold officially response
Bile for the stewardship OF this State in
tcrcst. 1t is rather remarkable that an