Peninsula enterprise. [volume] (Accomac, Va.) 1881-1965, 1899-03-11
SATURDAY, MARCH II, 1929.
Entered at the Postofhce at Accomat
G. H, Va, as second-class matter.


has made q most singular request OF
the Governor of Virginia. He wants
him to release citizens of Maryland,
now in our jail under indictments for
'feloniously taking oysters in Nir-
cinia waters" and to restore to the
former owners. the two boats now
held by the State authorities, in
which the felonies were committed
and with these ends in view the re-
quest is made by him of the Governor
of Virginia for an investigation. The
Executive of Maryland makes the re-
Quest too with the knowledge, which
is not disputed by citizens of his
State even, that the men now in our
custody were caught depredating
upon our oyster rocks and thereby
puts himself in the position of asking
immunity for felons and restoration
of the property in which they com
mitted the felonies. In other words,
the Governor OF this State is asked
to protect criminals in another State
in way which he could not do in
his own State if 81 like request was
made of him. Nor is this all. The
bateau, Water Lilly, one of the boats
which the Governor of Maryland will
ask to have restored to the claimant,
belonged to a man, whom, we are
advised, is an old offender against the
laws of the State and who with others
of the same name and family have
made themselves notorious as depre-
dators in the waters of the State.
OF course the Governor of Virginia
cannot comply with the request
which, after the investigation, the
Governor of Maryland will make of
him, or even advise the Court to do
it under whose jurisdiction the Mary
landers and their boats are held. The
Governor, at least, is clothed with no
such authority and any attempt Oh
his part to exercise any such preroga
tive cannot be too severely rebuked
by the people of the State and should,
we respectfully submit, be ignored
by the Court which has jurisdiction
in the matter.
That the Marylanders in our Gus,
tody did depredate on our oyster
beds, there is no question, and that
being admitted, was it wrong, if the
Virginia police boats, did cross the
line in pursuit of the law-breakers,
as it is claimed they did? The Rich
mond Dispatch answers the query in
the following: Eve are clearly of the
opinion that such course ought not
to be adopted, except in extreme
cases, but the right of pursuit of law
breakers has been the subject OF
many international controversies. and
our recollection is that it is admitted
in exceptional instances" If the Dis
patch is right, it cannot be denied.
that the parties in custody, caught
in the act of taking our property as
they were, furnish the exceptional
instance which would warrant us in
crossing the line to capture the men
and the boats, engaged in plurdering
us, and even if we did not have the
right to cross the line, there is no
question, we believe, of our right TO
detain criminals, who practically
admit that they are guilty of the
offences with which they are
charged. Maryland has no right to
demand that we give up the pris-
oners or their boats and Virginia,
because of the friendly relations
which exist between the States, has
no right to accede to any such de-
mand, fit has been or shall be made
hereafter.