48 	The Compact of 1785

mac. One Marylander has suggested that Maryland should
throw open the Potomac to legal dredging, and "clean
out the river". To do so would be very easy, for Virginia
passed an act for that purpose in 1934, the effect of it
being made contingent upon the passage of a similar act
by Maryland. Conservation officials have quickly pointed
out, however, that the river bed probably would be
scraped clean of oysters in from thirty to sixty days, if
this were done, and the task of policing the Chesapeake
Bay against illegal dredging would be made much more
difficult.

	In the late summer of 1946, therefore, it was uncertain
	how the problem of law enforcement in the Potomac might
	be solved. One main point on which Maryland officials
	have been agreed, however, is that if they could bring
	Virginians into Maryland courts for trial, and confiscate
	their boats, the job of enforcement could be done. The
	question has become, then, the power of Maryland acting
	alone to enforce the laws.

	VII. POSSIBILITIES FOR UNILATERAL ACTION

	There are two possibilities for Maryland by unilateral
	action to attempt to improve conditions in the Potomac.
	The first would be to try to prosecute Virginia violators
	in Maryland courts. The second would be to try to abro
	gate the Compact.

	Those with a sense of history will regret the necessity
	even to explore these possibilities. The Compact of 1785
	has been in effect for more than 160 years, and it is a
	landmark in the history of inter-state relations in this
	country. Yet almost from the beginning its utility to Mary
	land has been materially lessened. After 1789 it was no
	longer needed to secure to Maryland the unrestricted right
	of passage through the Virginia Capes, which had been the
	greatest single reason for Maryland's wanting the Compact.
	Also, as a further result of judicial construction, there