Peninsula Enterprise, March 10, 1894

Untitled

Sea -- Shellfish - Oystering : BaysideSea -- Shellfish - Oystering : LitigationInfrastructure -- Public - Government : Maryland-Virginia boundary

Commonwealth Attorney Fletcher had been in Washington during the week. The hearing in the Maryland-Virginia oyster cases, in which he is associate counsel for Virginia, began in the Supreme Court of the United States on Monday.

Untitled

Infrastructure -- Public : Colleges

Mr. John R. Rew, a student at the University of Virginia from this county, this session, and son of Mr. Frank T. Rew, Metompkin, has been elected president of the Washington Literary Society, for the intermediate term. We congratulate our young friend. His success in securing the prize over so many bright boys in that institution entitles him to the congratulations of all his countymen.

Untitled

Tourists and sportsmen -- Field sports - Hunting : FoxFields -- Livestock - Dog problemTourists and sportsmen -- Other recreation - Fraternal orders

Chincoteague.

A schooner loaded with lovers of the chase from Horntown and other points on the Peninsula arrived here last week with a large pack of hounds on their way to Assateague, where they thought all that was necessary, was to get on top of a hill there and enjoy the fun. Raymond did not see it in that light however and made a bee line up the beach to Ocean City. They did not catch him and the hunters after waiting 3 days for the return of their dogs, went to look for them and found three of them dead, for each of which they had refused $50. The owner of a flock of sheep, to which they had given chase, killed them.

Mr. August Flemming, of the firm of Houston & Flemming, sailmakers of this place died on 2nd inst., of heart failure, aged 48 years. He was a worthy man and useful citizen. At his funeral on Sunday about 150 Red Men, of which order he was a member, were in the procession, which were on hand to pay their respects to his memory. He was the first member to die since the Order was organized here about two years ago.

Untitled

Tourists and sportsmen -- Other recreation - BicyclingInfrastructure -- Commercial - Residential construction

Onancock.

Bicycles all the go on Main street now.

Capt. E. W. Hopkins will build at once on same site.

Meeting of Berry Growers.

Fields -- Crops - StrawberriesForests -- Forest products - Barrels

The berry growers of Onley and vicinity met at that point on Wednesday and organized by the election of B. T. Gunter chairman. The meeting was called for the purpose of considering the crate question, and after reading of letters of commission merchants who had been communicated with by Mr. Henry Battaile and hearing the views of Messrs. J. P. Wilson and J. F. Hobson, commission merchants, Philadelphia, who were present at the meeting, on motion it was unanimously agreed, that the interests of berry growers would be best promoted by using the gift crate again this season.

Messrs. Wilson and Hobson submitted facts, showing that the net returns to growers at Onley and vicinity, who shipped their berries in gift crates last season were larger than those received by growers at any other point on the Peninsula.

To Help the Oyster Industry.

reprinted from Richmond Times.Sea -- Shellfish - Oystering : SeasideSea -- Shellfish - Oystering : Law enforcementSea -- Shellfish - Oystering : Planting

Among the members of the House of Delegates whose efforts have been foremost in promoting the oyster industry in Virginia waters is Dr. Charles Smith, of Northampton. Dr. Smith is the successor of Mr. Southey S. Wilkins, who represented that county in the House during the last session of the General Assembly. He is the father of a bill which reduces the rent of the oyster grounds for planting purposes on the eastern or sea shore of Accomac and Northampton counties from fifty cents to twenty cents per acre. He supported his bill in an able manner before the respective committees of the two houses and the measure has since been passed by both branches of the General Assembly.

During the recent discussion of the general appropriation bill in the House Dr. Smith offered an amendment which intended to increase the appropriation for the purchasing and equipping of an additional steam vessel for the oyster fleet for policing purposes from $3,000 to $10,500. The amendment raised some little debate, but it was finally agreed to by the House by an overwhelming majority.

THE POCOMOKE QUESTION.

reprinted from Baltimore Sun.Infrastructure -- Public - Government : Maryland-Virginia boundarySea -- Shellfish - Oystering : BaysideSea -- Shellfish - Oystering : Litigation

Argument Concluded in United States Supreme Court.

WASHINGTON, March 6. -- Argument in the contested fishery rights case between the States of Maryland and Virginia was concluded in the United States Supreme Court today. When the court convened Thomas S. Hodson, of Maryland, resumed his argument begun yesterday, but spoke only for a few minutes. He was followed by James H. Fletcher, commonwealth's attorney of Accomac county, Va., who discussed at some length the jurisdiction of the Virginia court in which the decision now questioned by the representatives of Maryland was rendered.

Representative W. A. Jones, of Virginia, next addressed the court, and, after describing the geographical lines by which the boundaries of the two States are alleged to have been determined, argued that Pocomoke sound and Pocomoke river are separate bodies of water and could not be considered as forming together the Pocomoke river described in the compact made by the two States in 1785. He produced reports made by the War Department, in which Pocomoke river and sound are separately described, the one as a small river 150 feet wide and the other as 15 miles wide. He declared the contention of the State of Maryland that the sound and river are regarded in the compact as one to be absurd, and attempted to show that the sound is exclusively within the jurisdiction of the State of Virginia.

When Mr. Jones concluded, Gen. Bradley T. Johnson, of Baltimore, spoke for the State of Maryland. He explained to the court the history of the controversy, showed the circumstances which led to the compact of 1785 and to the Black and Jenkins award, and contended that the dividing line between the State, if it could be located, would show that Maryland has natural concurrent rights with Virginia in the waters of the sound.

W. R. Staples, of Virginia, spoke next, and made an exhaustive argument in opposition to the Maryland claims. He explained to the court that the line between the two States was conceded by each to be doubtful, and the controversy started back in the last century culminated for the time in the compact between the States in 1785. The commissioners appointed to draw up the agreement met at Mount Vernon at the invitation of President Washington, and the document which they prepared was subsequently ratified by the two States as sovereign States and has been considered binding upon each, ever since. The only question in dispute regarding it is simply one of interpretation. Mr. Staples then went on to argue that the interpretation accepted by the State of Virginia, that the dividing line is at Watkins Point, at the mouth of the present Potomac river, and not at Watts Island, is the proper one. In support of this assentation, he said, the court would find that all the legislative enactments of the State of Virginia, since the compact of 1785 was signed, regard Pocomoke sound as belonging absolutely to the State of Virginia.

Argument was closed by R. Taylor Scott, attorney general of Virginia. and Attorney-General Poe, of Maryland. Each discussed the three points at issue -- the question of boundary line, the jurisdiction of a Virginia court over citizens of Maryland arrested upon the waters now in dispute and the validity and interpretation of the original compact.

Mr. Poe spoke last. He declared that if the court decided the compact to be invalid, then the State of Maryland has no case. The validity of the document, however, leaves the question of interpretation to be decided, and in this connection he made a strong argument in favor of the interpretation accepted by Maryland, but denied in Virginia. This has been further strengthened by the Black and Jenkins award, he declared, and also by the decisions of the judges of the lower court, which affirm the right of the Maryland authorities to punish offenders for offenses committed upon the waters in dispute.

In reply to a question from Justice Grey, Mr. Poe said in the case of Wharton, now pending before the court, an indictment could have been found by the grand jury of Somerset county, Md., and there could have been no question as to the jurisdiction of the Maryland court to acquit or convict. He said a distinction was made by the representatives of Virginia between an offence committed against the State and one committed against the individual. So far as the law in the case is concerned he could not see how this subtle distinction could affect the right of the State of Maryland to punish her own citizens for the violation of a compact entered into with a neighboring State.

In closing Mr. Poe said, he felt confident the court would decide the questions presented in accordance with law and justice, and that the soundness of the claims made by Maryland to rights under the compact of 1785 in Pocomoke sound would be fully recognized. It will probably be some time before the court renders its decision.