WM. PRESTON LANE, JR., GOVERNOR. 1893

marginal sea area within its boundaries may be exercised
only "in the absence of a conflicting Federal claim", citing
U. 8. v. California; and

WHEREAS, The President of the United States has hereto-
fore issued an Executive Order authorizing the Secretary of
State and the Secretary of Interior to recommend establish-
ment of zones for Federal regulation and control of "fishery
resources" and "fishing activities" in "those areas of the high
seas contiguous to the coast of the United States", and the
Department of State in December, 1948, notified coastal State
officials that it will begin to put this program into effect; and

WHEREAS, said Federal executive agencies have introduced
in Congress and will attempt to speed the passage of a Bill
bestowing Federal ownership and control of the marginal
seas of all the coastal States; and

WHEREAS, the Department of Justice in the proceeding
above referred to entitled U. 8. v. California is attempting to
persuade the Supreme Court to declare that the San Pedro
Bay off the coast of California is a marginal sea and so a
Federal area, except as to points within headlands which are
within six miles of each other; and

WHEREAS, the headlands of the entrance of the Chesapeake
Bay are more than six miles apart; and

WHEREAS, the Department of Justice has publicly ex-
pressed the belief that the Chesapeake Bay, like Delaware
Bay, is an "historic exception" to the six miles headland rule;
and

WHEREAS, while the Department of Justice and the Execu-
tive Branch of the Federal government have stated that the
marginal sea rule did not apply to navigable waters within
the boundaries of the State and that its extension would not
be sought, there are many in office in the Federal government
who believe and strive to the contrary; and

WHEREAS, if the Department of Justice and the Executive
Branch of the Federal government could persuade the Su-
preme Court to overthrow more than a hundred years of
established precedent and to re-write the Constitution of the
United States in the case of the marginal sea, there is no
reason to believe that they cannot, in the near future, simi-
larly persuade that Court to extend that doctrine to the
Chesapeake Bay and the inland waters of Maryland and all