Legislative History	15

sion of the concurrent oyster laws. The form and style
of these laws was changed to conform to a re-codification
of all its oyster laws, which Maryland had made in 1945.
The only substantive change in the concurrent oyster
laws in the Act of 1947 was to eliminate that provision
which had required that a citizen of either State found
violating the oyster laws for the Potomac River should be
tried in the courts of his own State.

IV. JUDICIAL HISTORY

	The Compact of 1785 has figured in a number of impor
	tant judicial decisions, coming from the courts of Mary
	land and Virginia and also from the Federal courts, in
	cluding the Supreme Court of the United States. A num
	ber of basic constructions have been given to it.

	A. Binney's Case (1829). One of the best known of the
	Maryland cases construing the Compact is Binney's Case
	(2 Bland 95) . Binney, the complainant, sought an injunc
	tion against the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company,
	to restrain the Company from erecting a dam across
	the Potomac River. The Company wanted the dam to
	assure a supply of water for the canal, and Binney asserted
	that it would hurt him in the use of the river waters for
	his mill.

	In an elaborately reasoned opinion and with the aid
	of a neat little geometric figure, Chancellor Bland held
	that Binney would not be injured by the dam, and denied
	the injunction.

	In one part of his argument, Binney had put his case
	on a broad social ground, and cited the Compact to sup
	port his position. The Potomac River, he urged, must be
	considered a public navigable river far above tidewater,
	and as the common property and highway of the two states.
	He cited that boats had been dragged upstream as far as
	Cumberland, showing the river to be navigable naturally,
	and also that the Compact of 1785 had legally established

r'