The sea coast echo. [volume] (Bay Saint Louis, Miss.) 1892-current, 1904-12-03


The adoption OF the Bowers ovsto
law in this State precipitated the dis.
pute and caused 1t to become clearly IA,
nned, on account OF the dissimilaritv o
It's provisions with the Louisiana oyste,
laws. Persons claiming 10 be ACTING
under the laws Of this State would b,
arrested by the Louisiana patrolmen
while Louisiana oystermen would be
captured and fined under the laws ot
this commonwealth.
The conflicts became so spiritcd that
In order to prevent continual clasbea
ana perhaps actual bloodshed, the oyste,
commissions OF The two States met IN
Now Orleans and signed an agreement
defining a neutral line to be- observed
while the controversy is pending in the
courts. Louisiana clearly got the best
OF It in this agreement, and only few
weeks ago Mississippi oystermen were
ciamoring for Its cancellation on the
ground that they we're not given a fair
share OF the territory, but the neutral
line will doubtless continue until the
United States Supreme Court can reaoh
decision on the main question, as the
Louisiana Commission Is opposed to a
cancellation, unless 1t gives their oyster
men the right to fish in the entire terri
tory.
Louisiana comedies, In the original
bill filed with the United States Supreme
Court, that the act of Congress creating
that commonwealth left her water boun-
dary underlined from the mouth Of the
Pearl river to the Gulf, and also con-
cedes that the waters containing the ISL
ands are not in the Gulf of Mexico. But
she says that in order to reach the Gulf
OF Mexico from the mouth OF Pearl river
and complete her boundary line she is
authorized TO follow the deep water
channel from the mouth OF the Pearl
river to the waters Of the gulf. The
deep water channel as claimed by Loui-
siana passes around tho Mississippi
coast, entirely across Harrison and
Hancock counties, and, II the contro-
versy as made is established, it will ex-
tend Louisiana's territory ross more
than two-thirds Of the Mississippi water
front, and hem this Statein with only a
narrow outlet to the gulf in front Of the
eastern part of jackson county. In
brief, II Louisiana wins, Mississippi will
own less than one-half the water terri
tory to which she has always claimed
title since being admitted to the Union.
Louisiana also claims that pnder the
act of Congress creating her as a State,
she gets all the islands within three
leagues, or nine miles, of her eaast, re-
gardless OF where such islands may be
situated, and that any islands within
nine miles OF her coast, or eighteen
miles of the Mississippi coast, belongs
to her, because the act Of Congress ad-
mitting Louisiana to the Union ante
dates the Mississippi act. This gives
the controversy very complicated form,
especially in view Of the assertion that
much OF territory which Mississippi
considers islands is regarded by Loui-
siana simply as continuation of her
mainland, and in the voluminous testi-
mony offered she attemps to prove that
the formation OF tho marshes has been
constantly changing for many years,
caused by the heavy equinoxial storms,
and what looks like an island today may
be part of the mainland year or so
hence.
Mississippi agrees with Louisiana that
the water containing the islands and
oyster reefs in the disputed territory
are not part of the Gulf OF Mexico, and
that the act OF Congress creating the
State Of Louisiana does not define the
water boundary line Of said State from
the mouth Of Pearl river 70 the gulf.
Mississippi disputes the deep water
channel argument, however, and says it
is mere subterfuge on the part OF
Louisiana to piece herself out boun-
dary line; that the same Congress which
passed the act creating the State OF
Louisiana, leaving, by said act, break
of interval in the boundary line, by an
other act eompletely defines the Missis
sippi boundary line and admits this
State to the unioni that the act also
defines the boundary between tho States
Of Mississippi and Louisiana and across
the same territory, over which the Loui-
siana act is indefinite or silent, the Mis-
sissippi act is definite and outspokeR,
Mississippi also contends that Con-
gress, in creating States put Of the large
territory bought from France, was not
entirely familiar With the meanderings
Of the Cult coast, but that it was the in
tention Of Congress to give every State
jurisdiction oyer the waters and islands
therein lying south and in front Of the
land territoryj that the act creating
Mississippi was only the organization of
State in what had therefore existed as
the Mississippi territory; that Congress
never intended to extend the territory Of
one State around in front Of and south
OF any other State or Territory.
In fine, Mississippi believes that the
act admitting her to the Union intended
to embrace within the boundaries Of this
State all the water territory lying south