The St. Lucie County tribune. (Fort Pierce, St. Lucie County, Fla.) 1905-1920, 1905-09-29
The Wharf Controversy.

/ TNlI(OIN kIbl NJ
The action Of the county commits
sioncrS last week in requesting the At
tnrnry general Of the state to file an IN
formation in chanccry against t. =
Schuyler and others, OF Jensen, once
more opens up the dock question, amt,
as but one side, 50 far, seems To have
been heard before the tribunal OF the
people would respectfully request
space to present the other side.
During the latter part of the year OF
1899 several parties engaged IN growing
beans and vegetables across the Indian
river on the island interested them
selves in building wharf at Jensen SO
they could get their produce to the
railroad. These gentlemen called them
selves the Planters Wharf association,
and circulated a petition to raise money
to build a wharf,at the same time pray
ing the board Of county commissioners
Of Rreyard county to deed to them the
riparian right at the foot of CONNER
cal street in Jensen.
The deed was given by the county
and the wharf built, During the storm
of last October the dock was practically
destroyed, and the bean growers were
confronted with the condition that the
coming crop would find them without
means of getting it to the railroad, No
meeting of the original members of the
Planters Wharf association had been
held for some time and some of the
original members had left for other
states.
Under these circumstances. what was
to be done
Originally, the association was moth
ing but a few men linked together for
a common purpose without conStitu-
ton or bylaws to govern their pro-
ceedingS, and no means of raising
money except by voluntary subscription
The bean business was not in a flourish
ing condition and the few members did
not feel like taxing themselves for the
cost Of new wharf. Consequently, as
the best thing and at the time, the
only means Of getting Il wharf in time
for the bean season, the trustees, viz.
Geo. Baker, Geo. +. Coon and c. II.
Racoy, entered into an agreement with
ChaS, = Schuyler, whereby they were
to deed him the riparian right, he To-
build new wharf and operate it under
these restrictions, to wit. To be free
to the public. excepting small wharf
age charge for freight passing over the
wharf, sufficient to keep it in repair,
but not for profit,
This transaction was carried out. and
Mr.. Schuyler built Il magnificent dock,
which has since been the pride of every
JcnSenilc. The bean men rcjoiccd over
1t, and gladly paid the nominal wharf
age charge; everyone was cOntcntcd
and apparently satisfied. until Mr..
Schuyler built Il fish house, then trouble
began. And ! want to say right here
mat there Is not II solitary man who
sends freight over that dock, and paws
Wharfage, that has entered single
complaint; but all at once certain indi-
VldualS who never use the dock. eXcept
rs Il promenade or to hitch their launch
To, discovery that Il fish house was -
nuisance, and that Il wharfage charp.
was AN unjust claim against some other
mans pocketbook mind you, nothing
had come out of theirs and asked fo,,
I'm injunction to restrain Mr.. SCHUYLER
from charging Wharfage and building a
llSh house, regardless of the fact that it |
has long been decided in Florida that
llsh house Is not a nuisance and the fish |
business a lawful one, The matter came
before Judge Jones, who promptly re-.
FUSED the order.
ANA the queer part of it is that this
injunction suit was brought Nv the
county, and now the county commission.
nrs want to burden the taxpayers with
the expense Of another suit. II would .
seem that EXPENSES We're already hph |
enough, and that the county commits. |
sloners had enough on their hands with.
Dul constituting themselves mere cat's
paws to pull choatnuts out of the fire
Tor others who have only personal or
'el,iSn end to serve, by insulting a mul-
liplicity Of lawsuits. " '''''
But, aside from this, the fish houso iS
a good thing, for it not only brings
more men and money to Jensen. but Is
a source Of revenue, thereby lesseninV
the wharfage charges necessary -
MAINTAIN the dock, and to this oyt.nt
beng Il direct benefit to the patrons
You talk with some of the man u,bo
are 'egglng on the county commi.,
a. =
The expense of a lawsuit; that thew are
trying to prevent the maintainance NJ
a., Institution worth several hundrod
iollars yearly to Jensen, and they viii
1old up their hands in righteous indi"'
'ati0n. why. then, are they so inter.
'Sted N. preventing this fishing business
' u" , trying to deprive Mr.. Schuyler Of
Is TINS opposition to the fish business
because it enters into competition wiz
mother tlSh business here whose owner
$ one of those principal properv
lolders mentioned by the commission.
MS IN their resolution to the attorney
General; E i If not, what is it? Wa
hallenge them for their reason, we
Arrayed against this class of "princi.
'al property holders" are other loroo
property holders and every man of Jen.
en- and vicinity who pays Wharfage e'"
,,, Mhlch M should the commissioners con-
ut? Which will the court consider
l LARGE PROPERTY Uo, ms,