NATIONAL FISHERY CONGRESS. 
159 
large income. The prospects of acquiring a large revenue to the State have been held out. The 
income to he derived from oyster-culture has been very much magnified by those who have given the 
subject attention, and legislatures have become imbued with an entirely erroneous idea concerning 
the matter. Their aim has, therefore, been to secure as large an amount of the revenue as possible, 
and in many cases this has resulted in the enactment of laws which were practically prohibitory, so 
far as oyster-culture is concerned. This is the case in the State of Virginia. They have there an 
enactment allowing the leasing of the land. The annual rental was at first 25 cents per acre. The 
legislators from the interior of the State of Virginia believed that vast revenues’ were being derived 
from these oyster-bars, and it immediately became their aim to secure a larger share of this revenue for 
the State. The consequence has been that the annual rental has been raised, to the detriment of 
oyster-culture. 
Col. F. C. Zacharie, in discussing tlie subject, spoke as follows : 
As a member of the bar, as a lawyer, I desire to say something in regard to the laws which we 
have in the State of Louisiana, supplementary to the comments of Mr. Blackford and Dr. Moore. I 
am not familiar enough with the oyster laws of the other States to say what their provisions are, or 
what is the principle upon which the oyster tax is based. One of the chief difficulties which we have 
had in Louisiana has been that oyster-culture is looked upon by a large portion of our legislators as 
an experiment, and people from the interior are very ill-disposed toward making any experiments which 
increase taxation upon them. The theory of taxation is that it is a correlative and corresponding 
duty between the citizens and the government; that the government shall give him protection in life, 
liberty, and property, and that the tax which is levied on him is simply a correlative duty from the 
taxpayer to pay his proportionate share toward that protection. 
Now, in view of this, we have sought in Louisiana not to derive any revenue for the State 
beyond the needs of the regulation and protection of the oyster fishery, and so we have held out for 
very small taxation or fishing licenses, and have a tax upon planted oysters — a very small tax, for the 
purpose of meeting the expenses of the particular production and regulation of that particular 
industry — so that we have not sought to make the oyster industries of the State a source of general 
revenue. This is a tentative process or principle, because we look forward to the day, or at least some 
of us do, when these industries will become very much developed and very valuable, and of course 
as they become more valuable and remunerative and the protective system is more detailed and 
complicated, then will be the time for the State to tax that property, as it does all other property, in 
proportion to its value. 
I believe I make myself clear in announcing that the policy of my State has been not to derive 
a revenue from the oyster in dustry as a matter of general revenue, but merely to attempt to raise a 
revenue sufficient to regulate and protect the industry, and when we placed it on that basis we found 
that the people from north Louisiana and the interior middle district of Louisiana were perfectly 
willing to pass any legislation which they thought productive of good in regard to the oyster industry, 
providing it did not cost them anything. 
Mr. Meehan read the paper by Dr. Bushrod W. James, of Philadelphia, on “ Inter- 
national protection for the denizens of the seas and waterways.” 
Mr. J. F. Welborne, of Sanford, Fla., read a paper by Mr. George W. Scobie, of 
Titusville, Fla., entitled “ The fishing industry on the east coast.” 
Dr. H. F. Moore read an article by Dr. J. P. Moore, of Philadelphia, on “ The 
utility and methods of mackerel propagation.” 
Adjournment was then taken until Monday morning, January 24. 
Saturday, January 22. 
In the evening, in the music hall of the Tampa Bay Hotel, Mr. Charles H. Town- 
send, of the United States Fish Commission, gave a lecture on “The world’s seal 
fisheries, with special reference to the American fur-seal.” The lecture was illus- 
trated by lantern slides. 
