Virginia citizen. (Irvington, Va.) 1891-1921, 1908-01-24

pretty good sample of the others. and
| shall have to ask my correspondents
IN the future to encloes two-cent stamp.
not necessarily for publication, but as
matter of good faith.
DEAR AUNTY:-I would like to have
nye shares IN your "Shell Cat Co.
What is the price per share, and can you
get clear title to the shells? How
about the right of way? Have you a
cinch on the Cat? | would also like to
ask II your company has an option on
the fish trap in Ramps g. Carriers mill
pond? Please let me have all informa-
ton possible.
/ am yours, Categorically,
QUID NUNC.
L am glad of the opportunity to reply
to my correspondents through the lids
of the public press, and will say, firstly,
that / tried to float this Cat" Com
pany in good faith. started the Cat"
jumping with preferred stock at 81 per
share (Which was gobbled up before Sat
urday night and watered stock at SIS
per share, and found that had so many
shells attached to the "Cat" and so
much watered stock that after striking
several snags the company could not
float.
Common justice demands that our
friends and the public should be infor-
med of the nature of the obstacles that
gave the company its quietus. The
first question that arose was iurisdic-
ton. 1t seems that Mr.. Landlord plan
ted those shells on public bottom, viz.
the "Bottomless Pit" and it is repor-
ted that the Board of Fisheries have
been hauling the Inspectors over the
Goals (of the ''Pit," it is presumed) be-
cause of neglect of duty in failing
to list them in their returns of "plan-
ted oysters and shells.'' The Inspec
tors can't agree on wheth-
err it be Doggett's, or Brewington &
Doggetts' territory. And while they
are fighting it out, here comes the plan
ter and claims that it is ''barren bot
TOM" and then the longer gets on his
mettle and says that as the planter did
not stake it up prior to the running of
the Baylor lines, waiting until it was
well seeded, and as it is decidedly be-
low low water mark, it is surely with
in the Baylor survey. So there you
are. l have been working day and night
on this thing, have made application
for it, if it is decided that it is not
within the Baylor survey, but our friends
will have to be patient. have appeal
ed to our Representative in the Legis-
lature to look out for our interests. but
we have got to wait until the Legisla-
ture makes an appropriation to rees-
-ablish the Baylor line before we can
move with any certainty.
Interference to the right of way. YOU
nay bet your bottom dollar that moth |
ng but CREASED lightning" will dis
'ute any right of way with that CAT. |
About the "cinch'' on the Cat
nm somewhat at loss for an answer.
You see, this Cat is very swift, and as |
he race is not always to the swift
am pretty sure we can come up with |
his Cat by meeting her.
Several correspondents have asked |
he question about the FISH trap in |
he mill pond. Have been investiga-
ing the matter, and have found that
hat trap eyes the Board of Fisheries
Is an illicit still does the United States |
revenue officers; and so fare evaded tax
alton. And here the same old question
IL jurisdiction arises again. Inspectors
amt decide whose territory it is in. |
So, while they are fighting it out, the |
owner is milking the cow" of course.
But / am informed that should the
Board of Fisheries at their next meet
ing decide that it is taxable, and the
owner refuse to pay his tax, they will
send steamer up there to pull it up
and sell it, and turn the funds over to
the road fund-to shell another piece of
road. | wish to say in reference to
this trap" that we tried to get it, I'M
til the owner informed us that it would
not catch bull frogs. You see we wan
ted frogs to feed the Cat with, as we
expected keep her on the ''iump"
pretty we'll all the time, but we also
found that we could not float the stock.
Would have to stick stakes in the mud
and hang the trap to it, and pretty soon
we would have been assessed on plan
ting grounds, besides threatened with
protracted litigation with the tongmen.
So we let it drop.
One correspondent wishes to know
why we charge 81 for preferred stock
and So for watered. Now, that is one
OF the secrets of the success of the
trusts and Wall street. The preferred
stock pays 20 per cent semi-annual divi-
dends (this stock is owned by the trusts)
The watered stock sometimes pays FL
per cent annual dividends and belongs to |
the dear gullible public. And another
thing: when firm busts only the
watered stock busts, never the prefer
red. So our advice-as our company has
failed to materialize, and we have got
about as much "dog in the manger''
and Tom Lawson in us as any other
for our friends to always buv
preferred stock.
Regretting very much that our COM
oany died aborning, l am, yours to
count on, AUNTY SPEC.