Calvert Coin with Map of Maryland
The Compact of 1785


by Carl Everstine (1946)
Maryland State Archives | Summary Description | Help | Search
MSA SC 5330-11-5, Page 41 View page image (42K) Jump to << PREVIOUSNEXT >>
Opinions of the Attorneys General	41

any time to repeal any legislation relative to the Potomac,
without the consent of the State of Virginia." Then, with
out further comment on the earlier opinion, it was con
tinued:

	The effect of such action, however, would be to
	withdraw Maryland's consent to all existing legisla
	tion, and probably the adoption of new regulatory
	laws by the State of Maryland alone, would not be
	effective without the concurrence of Virginia, even
	as to Maryland citizens, in view of clause 8 of the Com
	pact. In such a contingency, the citizens of both states
	would probably have common rights of fishery, free
	of any regulation whatever.

	It should further be observed that all previous legis
	lation in regard to the Potomac, of which I am aware,
	has been adopted by each State to take effect only
	upon the concurrence by the other. Since the river
	was closed in 1931 for an unlimited period by mutual
	consent, it would seem that there is at least a moral
	obligation to obtain Virginia's consent to a change
	in the status quo.

	Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that
	any new legislation regarding the Potomac should be
	adopted to take effect only upon concurrence by the
	State of Virginia .... (18 Op. Atty. Gen. 214) .

	In these two successive opinions, then, both concerning
	the right of Maryland to repeal the Potomac River
	dredging law without waiting for Virginia's concurrence,
	it was said (1) "clearly, the Legislature of Maryland
	might at any time repeal any legislation of this char
	acter without the consent of the State of Virginia and with
	out reserving the right to do so;" and (2) "there is at least
	a moral obligation to obtain Virginia's consent to a change
	in the status quo" and "any new legislation regarding the
	Potomac should be adopted to take effect only upon con
	currence by the State of Virginia."

	B. Virginia. Only two opinions of the several Attorneys
	General of Virginia seem to have related to the Compact.
	The first, made more than twenty years ago, held that while



Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
MSA SC 5330-11-5, Page 41 View page image (42K) Jump to << PREVIOUSNEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An ecpCLIO electronic publication in the Archives of Maryland Series.
For information contact edp@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright July 24, 2013
Maryland State Archives