ee, 
vening years caught up so as to be at the time of the protest 
well above the standards of the Commission. There was, how- 
ever, under the law no way to remedy even the clearest case 
of error. The old fear and distrust had fastened upon the 
State an absolutely inflexible survey. The ground which lay 
within certain lines on a map might, by a process of dumping, 
be covered with ten feet of soft mud, but it would remain 
natural oyster bar under the law until the end of time, while 
ground outside of those lines, even though it might be def- 
initely shown that it was covered a foot deep with the finest 
oysters in the Bay, was barren bottom and there was no power 
in the Commission or in the courts to correct the error. 
So far as those cases were concerned in which ground 
above the standard at the time of the survey had been omit- 
ted, whether through neglect of the local man or for any other 
reason, the oystermen had no just ground for complaint. The 
charts had been published, the findings of the Board made a 
matter of public record and opportunity for protest and cor- 
rection given them. Having allowed this opportunity to pass, 
they could not, either in law or equity, be heard later to com- 
plain of an injustice on the part of the State. 
In those cases where the character of the ground had 
changed, the situation is not so simple. It was, we are told, 
the demand of the oystermen themselves that the survey 
should be a fixed and final determination. If this be true, and 
they had taken this position in order to prevent further shrink- 
age of the natural-rock area, they should have been prepared 
to pay the price of a fixed survey and make no complaint in 
the event of an actual extension of the oyster-bearing land 
into territory classified as barren by the survey. On the other 
hand, no one can read the Haman Bill and reach the conclusion 
that the Legislature ever intended to bring about a condition 
of affairs under which ground well stocked with natural-rock 
oysters should pass into the hands of private owners for a 
merely nominal rental. We are driven irresistibly to the con- 
clusion that in 1906 both parties believed that the natural-rock 
area was shrinking and that the natural-rock oystermen, or 
rather their leaders, believed that they were driving a good 
bargain when they got a fixed survey, and that the advocates 
