Peninsula enterprise. [volume] (Accomac, Va.) 1881-1965, 1896-07-04
Governor 0'Ferralrs Reply to the Let.
ter of Gov. LoWndcs.
He Declines to Release the Crabbers.


airy line to prevent further trouble
between the sister States, Governor
O'Ferrall, of Virginia, has sent a
lengthy communication to Governor
Lowndes. The reply shows that the
Governor OF Virginia understands the
situation, and that while willing to
accord to a sister State all that is due
to her, is not forgetful of the duty
which he owes to his own State.
The letter is as follows:
MY information, which l deem re.
liable, is that the arrests to which
you refer were made within the terri
tory of Virginia, and that the men
were engaged at the time of their ar
rest in violating the laws of Virginia
prohibiting non-residents from oys
tering or grabbing in her waters.
II am further informed that the
buoys placed on the dividing line be
tween Maryland and Virginia have
been destroyed from time to time by
designing men, and that if they were
replaced it is believed they would
again be destroyed. 1t is insisted that
there are land objects which clearly
indicate the line, and that they are
ample to enable any citizen of either
State to ascertain it if he uses ordi
nary precaution.
However, desiring that there shall
be no room in the future for any citi-
zen of either State to mistake the line
or plead ignorance when arrested for
a violation of the law, l adopt your
suggestion that the buoys be replaced
the cost to be borne equally by the
two States, and the time and commits
sioners to be hereafter agreed upon
by us.
Now, as to your request that
Aaron Byrd, William Moore George
Powell recently arrested for illegally
taking crabs in Virginia's waters and
now in custody III Accomac county,
this State, be discharged and their
boats returned to them, beg to say
that these men are now in the hands
of the law officers of said county and
l have no authority to order their
discharge, or prior to their convic-
ton, grant pardons.
II beg to say further that one Of
the boats since its capture was forci
bly, taken by number of citizens Of
Maryland from the custody of the
law officer of this State who had it in
charge and carried back to your
State. and that until it is returned to
said law officer | must respectfully
decline to entertain any request in
connection with it or for the restitu
ton of the other boat. You will agree
the severest condemnation and the
persons who were engaged in it merit
punishment. | respectfully submit
that if the complaint which has been
made to you that citizens of your
State were illegally arrested in Mary
land waters be true, it is equally true
that an illegal seizure was made IN
Virginia waters by citizens of Mary
land.
Il desire to assure you that there is
no disposition upon the part of Vir
GINA to deal harshly with the citizens
of Maryland all she desires to do is
to preserve her waters for the use
of her own people and to prevent the
citizens of any other State from
depredating upon her oyster or crab
bling grounds.
maryland has laws similar to those
of Virginia except they are more
rigid, believe, for understand in
your State the citizens of one county
cannot work in the waters of another
county. Virginia does not so restrict
her citizens.
Virginia has suffered long and
much from the incursions of those on
her border, and for years prior to
1894 she lost annually thousands of
dollars; since then l have been graft
fed to find that her rights have been
generally respected and she has had
little cause to complain.
AS an evidence Of her disposition
to continue and cultivate the most
pleasant relations with Maryland,
with whom she is SO closely connected
in business interests and social in
tercourse, l point to her action in
1894 in resolving doubt against
herself and returning two captured
boats. l refer also to an act of her
General Assembly, approved March
Sth, 1894, entitled An act to provide
reciprocal rights and powers between
the States of Maryland and Virginia.
and which is as follows:
Il. Be it enacted by the General
Assembly of Virginia, That is shall
be lawful when the laws of Virginia
are violated by citizens of Maryland
in the waters of Virginia, and when
the laws of Maryland are violated by
citizens of Virginia in the waters OF
Maryland, that the offenders can be
pursued by the legally constituted
authorities of said State where the
offense was committed, up to and
across the boundary line between
said States, into the waters of said
State where the offender resides, to
a distance not exceeding ten miles,
and, if capture is made in the
continuous pursuit, the offender,
vessel and property shall be taken to
the State where the otfense was COM
mitted, to be dealt with under the
laws of said State.
-. This act shall be in force from
the passage of similar act by the
General Assembly of Maryland.
cit was with deep regret that l
learned that the General Assembly
of Maryland in its wisdom declined
to pass similar act. 1t seemed to
me that it would have been to the
advantage of both States, for now a
violation by citizen of one State
can be committed just across the line
in the other State, and when dis
covered the violator can slip back
and escape arrest and watch his OPP
portunity to repeat his depreciation.
1 must admit, however, that Virginia
would probably have been more
benefited than Maryland, for it ap
pears that Virginia has suffered far
more than Maryland by the raids of
1T is proper for me to state that
no inference must be drawn from
anything herein written that I will
extend clemency to the men if con-
victed, or that if the seized boat is
ratrrnp6 [ will raStnre either of the