Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-06-24
IS HELD TO Be VIOLATION
NET FISHING ON VIRGINIA
SHORE AGAINST DISTRICT LAW.
Case to Be Appealed, If Necessary, to
the Highest Court in the
Land.

In deciding the Of John Evans. a
constable OF Alexandria county. Va,
charged with violating section N9B of tho
District code. which forbds fishing In thu
Potomac river with a dip net Judge Null
lowry today upheld the law. and decided
that resident of Virginia. who stands on
the Virginia bank below high water mark
and fishes in the Potomac river with a din
net, violated the District code. and Is sub
Ject to the fine proyided in the code Evans
was therefore convicted The case will b.
appealed to the higher courts. Attorneys
Crandal Mackcy and D. S MackalI declar-
ing that they Will carry II to the Supreme
Court of the United States, If necessary.
An attack was made on the constitution
ality of the law, as was foreca sted in The
star some time ago. Representing several
hundred residents of Alexandria county.
who make their living by fishing in the
Potomac river. Attorneys Mackey and
Mackall appeared in behalf of the defend
ant today. Assistant United States Attor-
ney Ralph Given appeared for the govern
ment.
The evidence in the case, which was
practically identical on both sides. was that
Evans. the defendant. citizen OF
Virginia. that he WAS standing on a rock
which protruded into the Potomac river
from the Virginia shore. and that he was
fishing from that rock with a dip net at
Contention of Defendant.
1t was contendsd for the defendant that
Congress had no right to pass a law in
fringing on the rights of the citizens of
Virginia. and that. therefore. the law was
unconstitutional According to a compact
between Maryland and Virginia. made in
1iso 1t was agreed that the citizens OF
both states should have fishing and wharf
age rights in the Potomac river The terri
tory in Alexandria county was given aft
erward to the United States for the District
of Columbia. but was later given back to
Virginia. 1t was contended by the defense
that in that act of retrocession. the United
States restored to Virginia all her rights
including fishing rights-which she had be-
fore the territory was given to the District
OF Columbia. Later. in 1871. a supplement
tai proclamation was issued, in which ref
erence was made to the compact of 17S5
between Virginia and Maryland and thus
indicating that the United States acquesced
in the rights of the citizens of Virginia
under that compact.
Governments View.
For the government, Mr. Given con-
tended that Virginia had given up her
rights when she gave the territory to the
District of Columbia; and that since the
retrocessior the United States has legis-
lated on many occasions to the high water
mark on the Virginia shore. and yet dur
ing that time, the state of Virginia has not
passed one act of legislation claiming juris-
diction over the fishing rights of her citi-
z: ms in the Potomac river or beyond the
high water mark on the Virginia shore
Judge Nullowny announced that the ques-
ton was important and close one. and
that he would follow the custom of inferior
courts in UNFOLDING laws of Congress 1eay-
ing 1t to the higher courts to declare the
law unconstitutional If they should so re-
gard the law.