The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1898-11-26

last CITY Council and the present one
and denounced the man who goes 10 the
city Council or the Legislature Tor sell
fish purposes.
On the motion Of Mr. Hi Montague
the thanks Of the association were ten
dered Mr.. Mccarthy.
THE OYSTER INDUSTRY.
Mr.. Barton II. Wise presented the re-
port OF the Committee on oyster IN
dustry His paper told OF the extent oi
this great industry and the small revenue
derived therefrom II was contenaea 'uo,
under wiser laws properly admlnis'etvu
the state would derive revenue mat ~
course OF time would pay me ttl"' Sc
Of the Commonwea ID. %.
The recommendation Of Captain Fey
Tor were approved ana a hlh sucp Es the
committee thought should Dtcome . ~
looking to the development az tnlS III
dusary. was submitted.
The report strongly aJvocat'd tne
neal Of the existing laws so FAR as they
are designed to keep outside cap1'"l ''0"'
investing .n oyster beds.
Hon. IT, r. Pollard said he woulo 90
violence to his own sentiments did ne hoe
dissent 10 the D1ncr read The state. nc
contenIod. did not own the oyster nt'-
toms but held them in trust ior 'le ~
uso of its citizens. The man from 'nc
valley had as much right 10 the use oi
.brro AS Che man in Tidcwater lie shl"
he Uss forced 10, disagree also win .ne
statement Of Captain Baylor thal tnt'e
were cocoon acres OF oyster planuins
ground. Nine tenths Of IL was aoso'u''
ly worthless. o.,.., 90 sbow
Mr. Wise asked Mr.. Pollard 10 s"v~
him the law upon which ne oaseu n,'
0N~-
te~ beds at 81 per acre for the putPo,o
~ enforcing police regulations. nc
thought the Tidewater people shoWeu +"
tacl, 90 franlSness when they said 10 'he
Valley peonle that they have as nlueh
ri~bt IN the oyster beds as those Nn'
live ON salt water He stated that ne
wanted TO warn the Tidewater peoP'r
unless they should become more npe, ~
Virciuia. i'm his Judgment. would many
do as Connecticut has dOne-seu the ueu9
outright for what they would nrihs'
Mr. Pollard said he cid not Wish 10 sc'
into an argument on the subject nut 'le
Code of Virginia distinctly RECOGNIZES,
the common law principle he had reterreu
10. 80.
Mr. Wise rejoned that this was an ,, aet
OF the General Assembly WHICH 'V"'N
be changed AT any time.
This committee was continued
TlDEWATER RAILROAD.
Mr. H. ID. Elchelberger made the report
of tb. Committee on the Tidewater tiec-
trlc Railroad. The election was carrleu
in Gloucester. and the report advocated
that the fight for the road be kept up
Nossrs. W. q. Pollard, J. W Fleet.
of King william. and W. ID. Carter, OF
Essex. were present i'm the interest OF
the road. Mr. Carter spoke for the Visl-
tors He said the reason why Baltimore
was opposing the road was that the sec
tion of country through which IL was pro-
nosed TO run the road was doing much
~ build ND Baltimore. The people down
there preferred 20 trade with Richmond
totb from a matter of sentiment and Tor
business reasons with this road people
could come from TapDahannocI 10 Rich
mond and return in the same day AT cost
of e. less than q trip 10 Baltimore ana
Aose less than half the time from pnsi-
mess Mr.. Carter gave some figures to
show the value Of the trade that goes
from, his county 10 Baltimore proving
that II would be- worth much to Richmond
10 have IL diverted 20 this city. He adVo-
Gated a thorough organization ana ac'
tive work looking TO arOusing the voters
who are 10 pass upon the question OF the
issue of bonds AT the May elections.
lion. II. r. Pollard. being called upon
for remarks. spoke OF the great adVan-
tace Richmond would reap If this road
sho-ld be built
The Committee on Tidewater Railroad
vqs continued.