Saint Mary's beacon. [volume] (Leonard Town, Md.) 1867-1983, 1897-02-25

cision and opinion acco11panying il
of the brilliant and Distinguished,
now lamented, Judge Go1dsborough
of this court, as to what constitutes
a natural bar of oyster within the
meaning of our planting laws, an
opinion, perhaps, more uidely quot
ed and accepted than sny other upon
the subject, little refn6fns for me
beyond ascertaining whelher or not
the testimony brings the particular
lots, or any Of them, within his de
finition of : natural . or bar d
oysters, to wit:
/ Glands where oysters grow ma.
turally and in large quantities and
to which the public are now and
have been for many years in the
habit of resorting with view OF
earning q livelihood by catching
this natural growth" And here, /
think, the true test of the whole
question, lands cannot be natural
oyster bars or beds merely because
oysters are scattered here and there
upon them, and because, if planted.
they will readily live aud thrive
there. But whenever the natural
growth is so thick and abundant
that the public resort to it for q
livelihood it is natural oyster bar
or bed and comes within the restric.
tions of the law and cannot be To-
Gated"
"Some 90 witnesses have testified
for the petitioners. The drift OF
their testimony tends to prove that
the lands within some or all of the
stakes Of the lots in question have
been resorted to BY tongers and nip
pers of oysters at various times for
years past, the catch being less now
than formerly, and with still dimin-
ishingy;eld, though the quantities
sufficiently large to justify resort
thereto by men seeking livelihood
by oystering for market. / infer
these witnesses all mean to say they
regard the lands in question as a
natural bed or bar. About 20. more
witnesses whose testimony was ten
dered by petitioner as being Of a
similar character were not heard, q,
but should be treated as cumulative
testimony. Yet it must be couced-
ed that the bulk of this testimony
is very general and indefinite.
Many of the witnesses have not been
on the spot for several years, and
their views of the location in ques-
ton are more or less guesswork, a
very uncertain method of fixing
points and distance on the water
and of determining valuable rights.
Nor has the locality of these oyster
lots been uniformly and generally
resorted to by oystermen, but when
the wind has been south and the
weather too rough to oyster upon
the rocks usually resortsd to, boats
have dropped in under the bank to
oyster, and almost invariably tonged
on the bar, which, as an inference
from the whole evidence in the case
of most Of the witnesses, ! assume
was to the eastward and immediate.
ly above the lots in question, for
most of the petitioners witnesses
stated they were above the weir, op.
posite the granary, or along the
bank, all being points above and
beyond Lots Nos. /, 2 and 8. And
the first witness called by the peti.
tionors, Captain Reveii, stated that
he thought there were very few, il
any, oysters on the Woolford Lot
No. 3.
"Some 15 witnesses have testified
for the respondent, men Of equa
standing with petitioners witnesses
mostly engaged in like calling and
employment of longing for oysters
and entitled to the same credit, anG
although they had contributed t.
the fund to vacate all oyster lot
improperly located aud taken up
they say, from examinations ant
tests honestly and industriousl,
made with tongs for six or sever
hours at o time, which time wa
divided equally over the five lots
J they found really what amounted T.
! no oysters in Lots l, Q and 3, AM
on Lots 4 and 5 oysters not in suf
ficient quantities to justify prac
; tical oysterman in resorting thithe
for the purpose of making liveli
} hood. Other Is witnesses were ten
Q dered by respondent as ready to tes
0 tify to the same effect as respon
? dents testimony npon result Q