m 
 
 wmm 
 
 ••■.."". 
 -■Hi 
 
 
 Mil 
 
 '■■■'.■■ : ---i ■:.'.:■■•■■ 
 
 ■i*M..-. 
 
 IB 
 
 
 ■■■'■ : ' V 
 "S8L. 
 
 SHI 
 
Class ^-fe ^-T 
 
 Book ~C 8 /r £ 
 /f/O 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2011 with funding from 
 The Library of Congress 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/reportofinvestigOOconn 
 
of Connecticut 
 
 REPORT 
 
 ATION 
 
 OYSTER PROPERTIES 
 
 BOARD OF EQUALIZATION 
 
 1910 
 
State of (Loanecticut 
 
 PUBLIC DOCUMENT— SPECIAL 
 
 REPORT 
 
 OF THE 
 
 INVESTIGATION 
 
 -•• f 
 
 OF 
 
 OYSTER PROPERTIES 
 
 OF THE STATE 
 
 BY THE 
 
 BOARD OF EQUALIZATION - 
 
 AS A 
 
 Special Commission appointed by the General Assembly of 1909, 
 Special Law 486. 
 
 REPORT PRESENTED TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF /on. 
 
 HARTFORD 
 
 Published by the State 
 tgio 
 

 publication 
 
 approved by 
 
 The Board of Control. 
 
 THE TUTTLE, MOREHOUSE & TAYLOR COMPANY 
 
Freeman F. Patten, 
 
 Treasurer. 
 Thomas D. Rradstreet, 
 
 Comptroller. 
 William H. Corbin, 
 Tax Commissioner. 
 
 Slat? of (Eottn? ttxmt 
 
 BOARD OF EQUALIZATION AND OYSTER 
 INVESTIGATION COMMISSION. 
 
 Hartford, December 28, 1910. 
 
 To the Members of the General Assembly: 
 
 The State Board of Equalization, which was appointed by the 
 General Assembly of 1909 under Special Law No. 486 as a com- 
 mission to investigate the oyster properties of the State, submits 
 the following report : 
 
 Before divine: in detail an outline of the methods of its inves- 
 — j 00 
 
 tigaiion, it seems desirable to present a brief history of the 
 development of the oyster industry in Connecticut so that the 
 members of the General Assembly who are not familiar with 
 the subject may be sufficiently informed before considering the 
 detailed statement of the Board, and its recommendations for 
 definite changes in the existing statutes. 
 
 HISTORY OF THE OYSTER INDUSTRY IN 
 CONNECTICUT. 
 
 The historical sketch given herewith is practically that which 
 was prepared by Mr. James P. Bogart, formerly engineer of the 
 Connecticut Shell-Fish Commission, and published in the fifth 
 annual report of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, for the year 
 1889. 
 
 "The rivers of Connecticut have been productive of natural 
 growth oysters from time immemorial. Cultivation of oysters in 
 the harbors began about 1845, and deep water planting in the 
 Sound about 1870. To-day nearly all the legally available ground 
 for oyster planting in the rivers, harbors, and bays has been desig- 
 nated, or deeded to private ownership, and in addition we have 
 a great system of more or less productive deep water oyster 
 farms stretching for miles from the shores and extending in an 
 almost unbroken line from Greenwich to Branford, an air-line 
 
HISTORY OF OYSTER INDUSTRY. 
 
 distance of forty-five miles, and again off Guilford and Madison, 
 a distance of seven miles. These submerged farms are covered 
 by thirty to seventy feet of water. 
 
 THE FIRST VESTED RIGHTS. 
 
 "Connecticut was the first State to grant vested rights in 
 oyster ground and the unrestricted enjoyment thereof. The 
 growth of her industry justifies the policy pursued. Legislation 
 which assured this policy was slow and not always attended with 
 good feeling. In 1842 it became lawful thereafter for the owner 
 or owners of any land in this State, wherein there may be salt 
 water, creeks, or inlets, to dam, gate, or lock the said creek or 
 inlet, for his or their use, for an oyster pond for the growing of 
 oysters therein. But this privilege might only be obtained under 
 conditions which rendered it almost certain to prevent any person 
 from enjoying a benefit from the provisions of the law. 
 
 THE PRIVILEGE OF TRANSPLANTING. 
 
 "In 1845 it was made lawful for any inhabitant of this State, 
 under certain limitations and restrictions, to lay down or plant in 
 any of its navigable waters, any oysters brought from any place 
 beyond the limits of the State. In 1846 the provisions of the act 
 relative to the laying down of oysters were extended so as to cover 
 any oysters brought from any place within the limits of the State. 
 
 A STATE RESIDENCE REQUIRED. 
 
 "In 1848 it was made unlawful for any person who is not 
 at the time an actual inhabitant or resident of this State, and 
 who has not been for six months next preceding an actual 
 inhabitant or resident as aforesaid, to take, rake, or gather any 
 oysters, either on his own account or benefit, or on account or 
 benefit of any employer, in any of the rivers, bays, or waters 
 of this State on board of any canoe, flat, scow, skiff, boat, or 
 vessel. 
 
 THE TWO-ACRE LAW. 
 
 "In 1855 the law known as the two-acre law was passed. It 
 provided that towns might appoint a committee not exceeding 
 five in number, who may, if the public interest requires, designate 
 to any person desiring to plant oysters an area not exceeding two 
 acres in extent. The law provided that if any man got more than 
 two acres for speculation or by assigning his rights for profit he 
 should forfeit and pay for each offense the sum of fifty dollars. 
 Limited areas of ground had been in use for some years prior 
 to 1855, and the law provided that occupants should be allowed 
 to retain these grounds on their compliance with the law within 
 a fixed time. 
 
HISTORY OF OYSTER INDUSTRY. 
 
 "At the time of the passage of the two-acre law the present 
 ideas as to extensive cultivation did not prevail. Indeed, it was 
 thought that two acres was all that one man could attend to. 
 For ten years after the passage of the law the cultivation of oyster 
 ground was confined to the rivers and harbors of the State, and 
 areas inside of the Norwalk Islands. In 1865 offshore planting 
 in twenty to twenty-five feet of water, at low water, began between 
 Fish Island and Norwalk Islands. In 1870 planting offshore in 
 •thirty feet and over began outside of the Norwalk Islands, and 
 was followed a few years later by deep water planting outside of 
 New Haven Harbor. 
 
 "In 1864 the property in the claims set out in accordance with 
 the provisions of the acts of 1855 and 1864, was made liable to 
 assessment and taxation in the towns where such claims were 
 situated, in the same manner as other property. 
 
 ESTABLISHING A STATE COMMISSION. 
 
 "The influx of capital into the industry and the demand for 
 greater security of tenure led in 1881 to the passage of an act 
 establishing a State Commission for the designation of oyster 
 grounds. The execution of the provisions of the act was 
 entrusted to a board of commissioners of shell-fisheries. In 1889 
 radical changes were made in the law regulating the offshore 
 fisheries. 
 
 CONTESTS AT THE CAPITOL. 
 
 "No mention has been made of the contests waged at the 
 Capitol relative to the use of steam, and the final adoption of 
 laws which make it lawful for a man to dredge with steam on his 
 private property, between the hours of sunrise and sunset, but 
 make it unlawful to dredge with steam on the natural beds. All 
 legislation affecting oyster interests has been vigorously con- 
 tested. Many laws were enacted to meet individual necessities. 
 Some of these would have been admirable if the designation of 
 oyster grounds from the outset had been regulated by methods 
 which would have insured to the owners accurate town records 
 respecting the location of their grounds. 
 
 STATE MAP WORK. 
 
 "For preliminary map work, the State has used three methods 
 of procedure in dealing with the offshore town designations of 
 oyster grounds. 1. Grounds that had not been occupied, but hav- 
 ing records that were capable of being construed, were placed on 
 the state maps in accordance with the construction that best 
 satisfied the general intent. 2. Grounds that were occupied, and 
 the positions of which were indeterminate by record, or capable 
 
HISTORY OF OYSTER INDUSTRY. 
 
 of holding many positions by record, were mapped in accordance 
 with the understandings of the claimants, thus keeping the 
 claimants apart till legal adjustments of their rights could be 
 effected. 3. Grounds occupied or unoccupied, having records free 
 from inherent discord, were mapped in strict conformity with said 
 records. Prior to 1881, planters would oftentimes, with the con- 
 sent of the town oyster ground committee, experiment on ground 
 for several years before taking out designation papers. 
 
 "The maps and records made by the State Shell-Fish Com-, 
 mission are calculated to stand the tests that they are liable to 
 be subjected to. At the outset, the cooperation of the United 
 States Coast and Geodetic Survey was secured. An outfit of 
 instruments and tools adequate for the work was bought. Proper 
 signal stations were built on the hills and along the coast, as far 
 east as the Connecticut River, and these, together with the light- 
 houses, church spires, and numerous other suitable objects, were 
 accurately located by a bold system of triangulation work, thus 
 securing the truth as a base from which to start the map work. 
 The corners of offshore lots were marked by buoys of cedar spars 
 or scantling, say thirty/ feet in length, anchored by stones weighing 
 one to two pounds/' 
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF THE OYSTER. 
 
 "Oysters are male and female at spawning time, but at no 
 other time; the male appears at the proper season in numbers 
 equal to the female, whose possible eggs are estimated at sixty 
 millions. But the waste is very great. Unless fertilization is 
 immediate, the sea water destroys the eggs and the compar- 
 atively few that reach embryonic stage and swim about at the 
 surface of the water for a day or two, are decimated by fish, per- 
 haps by the jelly-like young of the star, while cold rains and 
 winds are equally destructive. The surviving embryo descends 
 and fastens itself to any smooth clean surface by exuding a 
 cement, and is then called 'spat.' But its danger, though much 
 reduced, is still great ; crabs, carnivorous gasteropods, and various 
 fish eat it, and such a multitude settle in the same vicinity, that 
 when they grow they crowd each other to death. Few survive 
 to feed on algaa and to make their shells of the carbonate of lime. 
 If they have adhered to a soft bottom they grow fast but long 
 and thin, 'shanghais' they are called, and are, as soon as cir- 
 cumstances permit, transplanted ; if they settle upon hard and 
 gravelly bed they enlarge more slowly, but in a round and hand- 
 some way. After two years they are knocked apart and trans- 
 planted. Another year brings them to the 'culls' stage, or they 
 are sold as seed; the fourth finds them, in the language of the 
 market, 'boxes' and the fifth 'extras.' All this while they have 
 been suffering from star-fish, the drills, the winkles, storms, 
 
HISTORY OF OYSTER INDUSTRY. 7 
 
 and mud. In a short time a whole colony will be wiped out by the 
 insidious 'five fingers' in his insatiable search for food. 
 
 CULTIVATION. 
 
 "The system of Sound planting, or more properly deep water 
 oyster farming, is quite complicated. It began in 1865 in water 
 twenty to twenty-five feet in depth, between Fish Island and 
 Norwalk Islands. In 1870 the planting began outside of the 
 Norwalk Islands and a few years later off New Haven Harbor. 
 The planting consists in the strewing of three or four hundred 
 bushels of oyster shells, and thirty to forty bushels of mature 
 oysters to the acre, in order that they may settle on suitable 
 bottom. This is done in the months of July and August. The 
 planting of the old oysters is often omitted when adjoining beds 
 are likely to furnish spat for the new bed or in the case of 
 renewal of an old bed. Experiments have been made with crushed 
 blue stone. Gravel has also been sown. The spat will adhere 
 to anything that is clean ; even old rubber boots have been dredged 
 up with a thriving colony attached. If there is no spat, the 
 shells or other material must be dredged up to be dried on the 
 docks for use the following season. If permitted to remain under 
 water they become slimy and therefore useless. After the beds 
 are prepared the planter is kept busy watching for the star-fish 
 and dredging for them ; he is also stirring up his beds at the 
 proper times. Then comes the dredging and the sale of seed 
 oysters, the sales for market and for export with the attendant 
 opening, if the planter indulges in the shucking trade. The ' 
 successful planters are at work the year round, for it is in this as 
 in other occupations — to well-directed industry nothing is denied. 
 
 "Cultivation has been extended to bottoms which have been 
 thought unfit owing to softness or other causes. This has neces- 
 sitated the devising of dredges of peculiar construction to meet 
 special cases, and the acquirement of great skill in their use. If 
 such were not the case, many crops would not be gathered. Sev- 
 eral kinds of dredges have been patented which are expressly 
 designed to catch star-fish. Some of these catch only star-fish and 
 other light animals, and do not disturb the oysters." 
 
 An oyster grower, who has been in the oyster business more 
 than forty years and his father before him, has given the fol- 
 lowing statement of the methods and conditions based on his 
 recollection and experience : 
 
 EARLY METHODS. 
 
 "The oyster cultivation previous to 1870 was almost entirely 
 inside of what is now the line between town and State. There 
 were some grounds in what are now state waters, off New Haven, 
 
EARLY METHODS AND EXPERIMENTS. 
 
 south of the Old Lighthouse, and some off Greenwich. The 
 principal places in Connecticut up to that time, where oysters 
 were planted, were New Haven, Bridgeport, Norwalk, Darien, 
 Stamford, and Greenwich. Large quantities of southern oysters 
 were brought in schooners and planted at New Haven each spring 
 to be used through the summer and early fall. The oysters were 
 taken up in small boats with oyster tongs, or oyster rakes, and 
 by hand dredges. They were towed by sailboats to Fair Haven, 
 where they were opened and shipped in small kegs all over the 
 country. South Norwalk shipped mostly to New York in barrels 
 the oysters that were raised near Greenwich, Stamford, Darien, 
 and the Norwalk Islands. In the seventies a trade started up 
 in England for the American 03^ster. There was a small demand 
 at first, but it gradually increased until as high as 160,000 barrels 
 were shipped in a season. The oysters were sent there in the 
 spring and laid down on beds to be used through the summer 
 months when their native oysters were not allowed to be sold. 
 But as the American oysters were laid down in shallow water near 
 some of the large cities where they would be exposed at low tide, 
 the Board of Health finally prohibited the use of these beds, as 
 being dangerous to health, thus cutting down the importing of 
 the American oysters from 160,000 barrels to about 20,000 barrels. 
 As but few beds could be found where oysters were not exposed 
 to the danger of losing them by storms, a large opening for 
 Connecticut oysters was cut off. 
 
 EXPERIMENTS. 
 
 "The first steamer built for the ojster trade was in 1877 
 at South Norwalk, and in a few years there was quite a number 
 which made it possible to cultivate oysters in the deep waters 
 of Long Island Sound. When the first grounds were taken up 
 in the Sound under the state law which we have now, the oyster- 
 men were allowed five years to give the ground a trial, and if 
 found to be unfit for oyster cultivation, they could deed back to 
 the State at any time inside of the five years such grounds. The 
 State would then refund the money less ten cents per acre, which 
 went for cost of surveying the grounds in the first place. That 
 was, as may be seen, in the nature of an experiment, as thou- 
 sands of acres were found unfit for oyster cultivation, and the 
 oystermen were out thousands of dollars by the experiment. 
 
 "As it takes from four to five years to mature oysters, the 
 dangers from storms which bury them so that they are smothered 
 in the sand or mud as the case may be, from star-fish and 
 drills which destroy millions of young oysters every season, are 
 much greater than to the farmer's crop, which matures 
 every year. The farmer has the advantage of being able to walk 
 over his land every day, whereas the oysterman can only go over 
 
INSPECTION TRIP. 
 
 his grounds and try them with dredges here and there. In this 
 way it is quite easy to miss a body of star-fish on a long piece 
 of ground. The drills are so small that not much can be done to 
 catch them, except to keep the grounds well dredged with wle 
 netting inside the dredge. 
 
 "The principal outlet for our oysters to-day is in bulk, opened 
 and shipped all through the West, even to the Pacific coast. 
 Large quantities are shipped in the shells as far west as St. Louis 
 and Chicago, and some even farther west." 
 
 INSPECTION TRIP. 
 
 On September 30, 1909, the Board of Equalization and Gov- 
 ernor Weeks went to Bridgeport, and met the members of the 
 Shell-Fish Commission and Mr. Perry, the clerk, and accom- 
 panied them on their annual tour of inspection of the oyster beds 
 of the State. The Board's trip extended west as far as Stam- 
 ford with a landing at night at New Haven. 
 
 Opportunity was given to inspect the more important of the 
 natural beds, together with the nature of the bottom and product 
 of a large number of the grounds held under state franchises. 
 Captain A. W. Halsey, who had charge of the boat, extended 
 every possible courtesy and used every endeavor and opportunity 
 to explain in detail the practical features of the oyster-growing 
 business. The steam dredge was continuously used for the pur- 
 poses of showing the different kinds of bottom, oysters in all 
 stages of growth, together with the oyster enemies, the winkle, 
 drill, and star-fish. The dangers to the industry which arise 
 from storms, varying depth of water, sand bars, depredations, 
 and government dredging were also pointed out. The method 
 of hardening muddy ground by depositing on the same sand or 
 other hardening substances, and the process of shelling the 
 ground for the purpose of catching the spawn for the annual 
 set, if any, were also explained. 
 
 A similar trip was taken September 22, 1910. 
 
 ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S OPINION. 
 
 As the powers of the Board in making the investigations 
 were questioned, the following opinion was received from 
 Attorney-General Holcomb relative to the same : 
 
attorney-general's opinion. 
 
 Hartford, Sept. 14, 1909. 
 Hon. William H. Corbin, 
 
 4} Tax Commissioner. 
 
 Sir : — I have received your letter reading as follows : 
 
 'Enclosed herewith find copy of the resolution appointing the 
 Board of Equalization as a special commission to investigate 
 the oyster properties in this State. Will you kindly give said 
 Board your opinion relative to its powers in connection with the 
 oyster lands under the jurisdiction of the State and leased per- 
 petually to individuals? 
 
 'Does said board have power to inquire into the annual pro- 
 duct taken from such oyster lands by individuals and corporations 
 who hold perpetual franchise of such lands which are under 
 the State's jurisdiction? 
 
 'If said Board has not the power to inquire into the pro- 
 duction, revenue, and protection of such lands as stated in the 
 first part of section 1, would it have the power to secure infor- 
 mation relative to the revenue and production in connection with 
 the taxation of such properties owned by individuals, etc., as pro- 
 vided for in the latter part of section 1 ? 
 
 'Would the power to produce papers, books, etc., as provided 
 for in section 2, include the power to secure information relative 
 to the annual production and revenue received from oyster lands 
 by individuals and corporations?' 
 
 The resolution referred to is No. 486 of the Special Laws of 
 1909, entitled: 
 
 "Authorizing the Governor to appoint a Commission to investi- 
 gate the taxation of Oyster Properties," 
 
 and reads as follows : 
 
 RESOLVED BY THIS ASSEMBLY : 
 
 Sec. 1. That the State Board of Equalization be and is hereby 
 appointed a commission to investigate the oyster properties owned 
 by the State, the production thereof, the revenue received there- 
 from, trespasses committed thereon, the protection provided there- 
 for, and all things pertaining to the general care and management 
 thereof, and the matter of the valuation and taxation of such 
 properties in this State owned by individuals, firms, and cor- 
 porations, which commission shall report its finding and recom- 
 mendations thereon to the next session of the General Assembly. 
 
 Sec. 2. Said commission is hereby authorized to compel, 
 by subpoena and capias issued by any member of said commission 
 or other proper authority, the attendance of any person before it 
 as a witness, and to administer oaths and to cause the production 
 of any papers, books, or maps necessary for the purposes herein 
 provided for, and to punish for contempt to the same extent as 
 justices of the peace in criminal cases. 
 
 Sec. 3. The sum of three thousand dollars, or so much 
 thereof as may be necessary, is hereby appropriated to be paid out 
 of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the 
 actual expenses incurred by the said commission in performing 
 the duties herein required. 
 
 Sec. 4. Said Board of Equalization shall have and exercise 
 with reference to said oyster grounds, the power of a board of 
 
attorney-general's opinion. 
 
 relief, and such powers shall not be exercised by the Shell-Fish 
 Commission until the rising of the General Assembly at the 191 1 
 session thereof. And any person claiming to be aggrieved by any 
 order of said Board of Equalization in the exercise of its powers 
 as a board of relief may appeal to the superior court, in the same 
 manner as appeals now lie from the board of relief. 
 
 The State has exclusive jurisdiction over the territory covered 
 by the waters of Long Island Sound and its tributaries bounded 
 north by lines drawn between certain designated points along the 
 Connecticut shore, westerly and southerly by the State of New 
 York, and easterly by the State of Rhode Island. (General 
 Statutes, Sec. 3213.) 
 
 A portion of this territory consists of what are called "natural 
 oyster beds" which are designated in Sec. 31 14 of the General 
 Statutes, which I understand to be territory where oysters and 
 clams are self-propagating to an extent which makes the gathering 
 of them profitable. The Shell-Fish Commissioners are authorized 
 to grant licenses to persons to collect oysters and clams on these 
 natural beds for a term expiring on the next succeeding twentieth 
 day of July (Sec. 3234, General Statutes, as amended by Chap. 
 132, Public Acts of 1907). There are statutory provisions for 
 the protection of these natural beds, to prevent persons trespassing 
 thereon, and regulating the method of gathering oysters from 
 said beds by those holding such licenses. 
 
 The balance of said territory, or a certain portion thereof, is 
 adapted to the profitable cultivation of shell-fish by planting and 
 cultivation. As to this territory the Shell-Fish Commissioners 
 are empowered in the manner and under the conditions provided 
 by statute, in the name and on behalf of the State, to grant by 
 written instruments, for the purpose of planting and cultivating 
 shell-fish, perpetual franchises in undesignated portions of said 
 territory, to qualified applicants therefor. (Sec. 3215, General 
 Statutes as amended by chapter 66, Public Acts of 1907.) 
 
 Such lands so granted are taxable against the owners of said 
 franchises in the manner provided in Sec. 3226, 3227, and 3228 of 
 the General Statutes, as amended by chapter 148 of the Public 
 Acts of 1907. 
 
 On January 6, 1909, Governor Woodruff presented a com- 
 munication to the General Assembly calling attention to the 
 undervaluation and taxation of the properties covered by these 
 franchises, and suggesting the appointment of a committee to 
 investigate the subject, and to report what action, if any, the 
 State ought to take regarding it. Subsequently the late Governor 
 Lilley presented a communication to the General Assembly recom- 
 mending that a commission be appointed to investigate and report 
 upon the taxation of such properties. 
 
 In response to these recommendations the resolution above 
 quoted was adopted, and in section 1 thereof, the Board of Equali- 
 
12 INFORMATION FROM PRIVATE GROWERS. 
 
 zation was appointed as such commission, and was therein 
 empowered to investigate the valuation and taxation of the pro- 
 perties in which perpetual franchises have been granted to, and 
 which are owned by individuals, firms, or corporations. 
 
 To make such investigation effective section 2 of the resolution 
 authorizes the commission to issue subpoena and capias, and to 
 compel the production of any papers, .books, or maps necessary 
 for the purposes mentioned in section 1. 
 
 It is probable that the properties covered by these franchises 
 are not of uniform value per acre. Some sections of the territory 
 are doubtless more productive than others. The value of the 
 several properties depends upon their productiveness. The finan- 
 cial returns which the several properties yield to the owners is a 
 very important element in determining the value thereof. In this 
 State the rule of valuation for taxation is the true and just value 
 of any property. 
 
 In my opinion your commission is fully empowered by said 
 resolution to ascertain the production and revenues derived from 
 the properties covered by these franchises, and to compel any 
 information by witnesses, books, or papers which will enable you 
 to determine what is the true and just value of all properties 
 mentioned in section 1 of said resolution. 
 
 Respectfully submitted, 
 
 M. H. HOLCOMB, Attorney-General. 
 
 REQUEST FOR INFORMATION FROM PRIVATE 
 GROWERS. 
 
 To secure specific information relative to the total and cul- 
 
 tivatable acreage, character of the ground, and approximate 
 
 production of each lot, held under perpetual franchise from the 
 
 State, the following letter and blank was sent to each holder of 
 
 such ground : 
 
 Hartford, October 7, 1909. 
 
 Dear Sir : — Pursuant to a resolution passed by the General 
 Assembly of 1909, entitled a "Commission to Investigate the 
 Taxation of Oyster Properties," Special Laws No. 486, enclosed 
 herewith find blank requesting certain information relative to 
 oyster properties in this State owned by you. 
 
 You are respectfully requested to make complete return of 
 all such properties, answering in detail the question on the blank. 
 If the amount of your holdings requires the use of additional 
 blanks, the same will be sent on request. The information given 
 will not be made public. 
 
 The return, made in proper form, and duly sworn to, should 
 be sent to the Tax Commissioner on or before October 30, 1909. 
 
 The careful filling out of the entire blank in the form indi- 
 cated, will greatly facilitate the work of investigation, and will 
 
INFORMATION FROM PRIVATE GROWERS. 1 3 
 
 result in your convenience by making it unnecessary to summon 
 you before the Commission in person. 
 Your truly, 
 
 FREEMAN F. PATTEN, 
 THOMAS D. BRADSTREET, 
 WILLIAM H. CORBIN, 
 
 Board of Equalisation and Oyster 
 Investigation Commission. 
 
 STATE OF CONNECTICUT 
 
 Return to the State Board of Equalization 
 
 OYSTER PROPERTIES 
 
 Return of Sheet No 
 
 Tow?i of , Conn . 
 
 Request for this information authorized in 
 
 SPECIAL LAWS NO. 486, SESSION OF 1909. 
 
 Section 1. That the state board of equalization be and is 
 hereby appointed a commission to investigate the oyster properties 
 owned by the state, the production thereof, the revenue received 
 therefrom, trespasses committed thereon, the protection provided 
 therefor, and all things pertaining to the general care and manage- 
 ment thereof, and the matter of the valuation and taxation of such 
 properties in this state owned by individuals, firms and corpora- 
 tions, which commission shall report its findings and recom- 
 mendations thereon to the next session of the general assembly. 
 
 Sec. 2. Said commission is hereby authorized to compel, 
 by subpoena or capias issued by any member of said commission 
 or other proper authority, the attendance of any person before 
 it as a witness, and to administer oaths and to cause the pro- 
 duction of any papers, books, or maps necessary for the purposes 
 herein provided for, and to punish for contempt to the same extent 
 as justices of the peace may in criminal cases. 
 
 Sec. 3. The sum of three thousand dollars or so much thereof 
 as may be necessary, is hereby appropriated to be paid out of any 
 money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the actual 
 expenses incurred by the said commission in performing the duties 
 herein required. 
 
 Sec. 4. Said board of equalization shall have and exercise, 
 with reference to said oyster grounds, the powers of a board of 
 relief, and such powers shall not be exercised by the shell-fish 
 commission until the rising of the general assembly at the 191 1 
 session thereof. Any person claiming to be aggrieved by any 
 order of said board of equalization in the exercise of its powers 
 as a board of relief may appeal to the superior court, in the same 
 manner as appeals now lie from the board of relief. 
 
 EXPLANATORY NOTES. 
 
 Contents of this blank will not be made public. 
 Cultivatable means capable of cultivation and not necessarily 
 at present under cultivation. 
 
14 INFORMATION FROM PRIVATE GROWERS. 
 
 Arrange the lots in groups as covered by mortgages. 
 
 The figures as to bushels may be estimates of the manager, 
 if precise information is not available. 
 
 Individual owners must personally sign and make oath to each 
 sheet. 
 
 If ground is owned by a corporation, the president, manager, 
 or other duly authorized official sufficiently familiar with the 
 details should fill out the blank. 
 
 Under "Value per acre" give amount you would be willing 
 to sell for, or fair market value, not at forced sale. 
 
 Under "Character of bottom" state whether hard, medium, 
 sticky, or mud. 
 
 In giving age of stock, state whether one, two, three, or four 
 years old, etc., or new set, as the case may be. 
 
 Lots in Quinnipiac River section : 
 
 Tomlinsons Bridge to Ferry Street Bridge, west side, desig- 
 nate Q. R. A., with number. 
 
 North from Tomlinsons Bridge, east side, designate Q. R. B. 
 with number. 
 
 Ferry Street Bridge to Grand Avenue Bridge, west side, desig- 
 nate Q. R. C, with number. 
 
 North of Grand Avenue Bridge, west side, designate Q. R. D., 
 with number. 
 Lots in the West River section : 
 
 North of Kimberly Avenue Bridge, New Haven, designate 
 W. R. A., with number. 
 
 South of Kimberly Avenue Bridge, New Haven, designate 
 W. R. B., with number. 
 
 North of Kimberly Avenue Bridge, Orange, designate 
 W. R. C, with number. 
 
 South of Kimberly Avenue Bridge, Orange, designate W.R.D., 
 with number. 
 
 Explanations and remarks are invited and may be written on 
 the back of this sheet. 
 
 Oyster properties of , Town of Conn. Sheet No 
 
 Oysters sold or transferred to other 
 
 c beds outside the State in the 
 
 Cultivat- rt " vsters past five years. Character 
 
 ahle •- x * of bottom 
 
 S, P re t s ent iqog to and other 
 
 a> s on beds. date. 1908 1907 1906 1905 comments 
 
 ** '2P on the 
 
 " . o . . . nature of 
 
 £T £E^2 JS £ A 2, 2 the lot. 
 
 C „ o • ^ u - ^ v v ° ° v 
 
 $ f 
 
 Does your system of bookkeeping include a separate account 
 with each lot to show profit or loss ? 
 
 Can you show exactly or approximately the cost per bushel 
 of the product of each lot ? 
 
 Do you keep an account of the number of bushels produced by 
 lot, either for sale or transfer ? 
 
 Signature and title of person who makes the return. 
 
 Date, 1909. 
 
STATISTICS FROM PRIVATE GROWERS. 1 5 
 
 State of Connecticut } 
 
 County of J ss - 
 
 Personally appeared the above named and made oath to the 
 truth of the above statement by him subscribed and of the matters 
 therein contained according to the best of his knowledge, infor- 
 mation, and belief. 
 
 ' Notary Public. 
 
 The Board of Equalization desires to give the matter careful 
 study and consideration, and to that end would respectfully request 
 suggestions on the following subjects: 
 
 Protection : 
 
 Trespass: 
 
 Contamination : 
 
 Changes in the laws relative to any phase of the oyster 
 industry : 
 
 Reports giving the desired information in proper form 
 were received promptly from many of the oyster growers, 
 including some of the larger growers, but several failed to con- 
 form to the Board's request. Many reports were received 
 which were not complete and apparently not made in good faith. 
 After considerable correspondence with some of the largest 
 oyster growers the reports requested were finally secured from 
 all but one. 
 
 While the questions were all answered, the bushel figures 
 given by certain growers in their report were not even approxi- 
 mately in amount those which the same had used in booklets and 
 published statements for advertising purposes. 
 
 STATISTICS FROM THE REPORTS OF THE 
 PRIVATE GROWERS. 
 
 Reports were received from two hundred forty-seven 
 owners of oyster ground franchises in state jurisdiction. The 
 total acreage of ground held under such franchises was reported 
 to be 70,855.17 acres. The portion of this acreage reported to 
 be sufficiently hard to be cultivatable was 24,707.08 acres. One 
 hundred forty-four growers stated that they had no oysters on 
 their beds at that time. One hundred and three growers 
 reported as having on their beds at that time 2,492,355 bushels, 
 an average of 24,198 bushels for each grower. 
 
 The largest amount reported as being at that time on the 
 beds by any one grower was 345,000 bushels, and he was not the 
 owner of the largest acreage of oyster ground. Six others 
 reported as having over 100,000 bushels upon their beds at that 
 
l6 STATISTICS FROM PRIVATE GROWERS. 
 
 time, as follows : 333,000; 290,000; 200,000; 184,507; 170,000; 
 and 119,000. These six growers are not the owners of the 
 largest amount of acreage. 
 
 The total amount of bushels which was reported as having 
 been transferred to other beds outside of the State or sold during 
 the past five years was as follows : 
 
 1905, 767,883 bushels. 
 
 1906, 1,197,350 bushels. 
 
 1907, 1,363,642 bushels. 
 
 1908, 976,668 bushels. 
 
 1909, 1,588,809 bushels. 
 
 • 
 
 The total number of bushels of oysters thus sold or trans- 
 ferred from Connecticut beds during the past five years was 
 5,894,352 bushels. These figures, however, do not approxi- 
 mately equal the published claims that have been made by indi- 
 vidual oyster growers in conducting their industries, and the 
 Board is forced to believe do not equal by a large amount the 
 correct totals. 
 
 The information given relative to the nature of the oyster 
 grounds showed conclusively that a large portion of the acreage 
 held under the franchises consists of muddy bottom. For the 
 purpose of cultivation such ground is much less valuable than 
 the hard ground. 
 
 The acreage of ground which is somewhat hard, but not 
 entirely so, may be given as approximately 5,000 acres. The 
 acreage of ground which is hard may be given as approximately 
 20,000 acres. The balance of the acreage may be considered to 
 be muddy ground, approximately 45,000 acres. 
 
 While an attempt was made to secure from the oyster 
 growers figures which would give some idea of the value per 
 acre of the oyster grounds, it was clear that the figures submitted 
 in the majority of cases could not be used for such purposes. 
 In a large number of instances they followed the previous 
 assessed valuations, while in cases of increase the value sub- 
 mitted was far from being a fair selling value of the franchises. 
 
 FRANCHISE TAXATION. 
 
 By consultation with the members of the Shell-Fish Commis- 
 sion, it was ascertained that in the matter of taxation, they had 
 been acting under practically the same rule of valuation that was 
 established when the Commission was created. They had been 
 
 ! 
 
FRANCHISE TAXATION. I 7 
 
 taxing the franchises under state jurisdiction outside of the town 
 lines at minimum figures following the tradition that none should 
 be assessed at a value higher than forty dollars per acre, and 
 assessing a large portion at one dollar per acre. 
 
 In spite of this tradition that no franchises should be assessed 
 higher than forty dollars per acre, the town of Orang-e, in the 
 revaluation of the oyster ground under the jurisdiction of that 
 town in New Haven Harbor, placed a value of one thousand 
 dollars per acre upon certain grounds which had been previously 
 assessed by the State at forty dollars per acre. Such a revalua- 
 tion, however, was placed on only a small area of shoal ground 
 which has a particular value for growing as well as storage pur- 
 poses. Such a relative difference in value would not apply to 
 any other ground within the State's borders. 
 
 The Board of Equalization, in view of the fact that it was 
 delegated by the resolution to act as a board of relief, considered 
 it necessary to secure, if possible, equalized valuations of all the 
 oyster ground franchises in the State, based as nearly as possible 
 on a fair selling value. It was very evident that this was proper, 
 and could be accomplished through experts only, for it would 
 demand not only knowledge of the oyster business, but a defi- 
 nite knowledge of the oyster ground franchises in Connecticut, 
 based upon business experience. Even the method of deter- 
 mining the valuation ; by inspecting the lots and dredging the 
 same to reveal the character of the bottom was shown not to be 
 reliable, for certain hard ground is useless for oyster produc- 
 tion for various reasons, while other hard ground is very valu- 
 able. In addition, some soft and muddy ground is very well 
 adapted to setting, providing oysters are not left there too long, 
 while other soft grounds appear to be almost useless, until they 
 are hardened by depositing sand, shells, etc. Furthermore, a 
 dredge thrown on one corner of a lot might show a very valuable 
 bottom containing a good production of oysters, while other por- 
 tions might be soft mud. The time required for such inspection, 
 the cost, and the unsatisfactory and unreliable character of the 
 data to be secured made it advisable to abandon such methods 
 for the purpose desired. 
 
 EXPERT VALUATION. 
 
 The only other plan was to secure the cooperation and ser- 
 vices of a competent and experienced expert to make the valua- 
 
1 8 NEW VALUATION FOR TAXATION. 
 
 tions. The Board finally secured for such purposes Captain E. 
 Frank Lockwood of Cos Cob, Connecticut. He is a man of 
 large experience in the oyster business, which was followed by 
 his father and which has been continued by him for forty years 
 or more. He has a definite knowledge of practically all the 
 oyster ground in Connecticut, and has bought and sold a large 
 amount of such land. Captain Lockwood, recently, had sold out 
 his oyster business in Connecticut, and at that time he owned no 
 oyster ground, nor had he business affiliations with any oyster 
 growers. Many of the oyster growers have stated that there 
 could be no better selection of authority to determine the value 
 of Connecticut ground franchises. 
 
 Arrangements were made with Captain Lockwood to place 
 an acreage appraisal on all the oyster ground in the State under 
 private ownership, on the basis of its fair value. Mr. Fred- 
 erick L. Perry, the clerk of the Shell-Fish Commission, who is 
 designated by the statutes as the official assessor of all such 
 oyster lands, signified his entire willingness to follow the 
 appraisal made by Captain Lockwood, as accepted by the Board. 
 The result was that the assessed valuations of all the oyster 
 lands in the State's jurisdiction as made by Mr. Perry, with the 
 exception of some of the harbors, were, practically, the appraisals 
 made by Captain Lockwood. 
 
 METHOD OF TAXATION. 
 These assessed valuations, as finally determined by Mr. 
 Perry, were graded from $5.00, as the minimum valuation per 
 acre, to $150.00 per acre, as the maximum, on the grounds within 
 the State's jurisdiction and outside the town limits. The pre- 
 vious valuations for the same lots had been $1.00 and $40.00 per 
 acre, respectively. The valuations of the other lots under the 
 special franchise were graded between the minimum and maxi- 
 mum in accordance with their fair value as compared with other 
 lots. The valuations of the lots under state jurisdiction within 
 the town lines recently had been readjusted, many of them of 
 higher value up to $1,000 per acre. Very few changes were 
 made in such valuations at this time by Mr. Perry. 
 
 BOARD OF RELIEF. 
 
 In accordance with the resolution requiring the Board of 
 Equalization to act as a board of relief, the following notice was 
 
ACTING AS BOARD OF RELIEF. 1 9 
 
 published in all the newspapers in towns contiguous to oyster 
 
 grounds : 
 
 NOTICE. 
 NOTICE is hereby given that the BOARD OF EQUALI- 
 ZATION, as the commission appointed to investigate oyster prop- 
 erties in accordance with Special Law No. 486, Session of 1909, 
 will meet as a BOARD OF RELIEF to consider appeals from 
 assessments on oyster grounds within the exclusive jurisdiction 
 of the State, on the Tuesday following the first Monday in 
 January, 1910, to wit, January fourth, in Room 60, the State 
 Capitol, Hartford, at 10.45 A- M - 
 
 FREEMAN F. PATTEN, 
 THOMAS D. BRADSTREET, 
 WILLIAM H. CORBIN, 
 
 Board of Equalization. 
 Hartford, Connecticut, 
 
 December 20, 1909. 
 
 All applicants for relief were required to fill out the follow- 
 ing blanks, using a separate one for each lot, unless they were of 
 similar nature and valuation. In each case the several lots were 
 designated and described on one application. 
 
 Sheet No 
 
 STATE OF CONNECTICUT 
 1910 
 
 OYSTER PROPERTIES 
 
 Application to the Board of Equalization, acting as a Board of 
 Relief, as provided in Special Law 486, Session of 1909. 
 
 A separate sheet should be used for each lot on which a 
 reduction is requested, except that all lots at the minimum 
 valuation may be included on one sheet. 
 
 Complaint of Owner. 
 
 Location of ground : 
 
 Town Lot No 
 
 Kind of ground 
 
 Total num- Acres not 
 
 ber of acres Acres Acres not Acres actually actually culti- 
 
 in lot. cultivatable. cultivatable. cultivated. vated. 
 
 Assessed valuation 
 Owner's valuation 
 
BOARD OF RELIEF HEARINGS. 
 
 Estimated number of bushels of oysters on 
 
 lot at present time Age. 
 
 Number of bushels caught for transfer or 
 
 sale during the past five years Age. 
 
 Reasons for complaint 
 
 Signed 
 
 Date , 1910. 
 
 Three hearings were held in the Supreme Court Room, at 
 the State Capitol, on January 4, 14, and 25, 1910. Sixty-two 
 individuals or corporations presented 356 applications for relief. 
 Forty-seven persons at the various hearings appeared before the 
 Board and after being put under oath were heard relative to the 
 claims for a reduction in valuation as set forth upon the indi- 
 vidual's application. The proceedings of the hearings were 
 taken stenographically and are included in a record of 172 type- 
 written pages. 
 
 There was comparatively little opposition to the assessed 
 valuation of the more valuable lots, but there was great objec- 
 tion to the increase in valuation from $1.00 to $5.00 on the 
 so-called "worthless ground." The hearings were of very great 
 benefit to the Board, enabling the members to become acquainted 
 with the oyster growers, and to secure much information rela- 
 tive to the nature and treatment of the ground used for the culti- 
 vation of oysters, with many other details of the business. In 
 the main, the valuations, as determined by Mr. Perry, were 
 approved by the Board. A few changes were made where evi- 
 dences of inequality in the valuation of one lot, as compared with 
 the similar contiguous lots, were made clear in the testimony. 
 The Board decided to adhere to a minimum valuation of $5.00 
 on a portion of the grounds. The general reasons for this action 
 are given on page 21 of this report. 
 
 The total assessed valuation of oyster ground under state 
 jurisdiction for the year 1909 was $889,412.92. The total 
 assessed valuation of the same oyster ground as approved by the 
 
MINIMUM VALUATION OF OYSTER GROUNDS. 21 
 
 Board of Equalization, as a board of relief, for the year 1909 
 was $1,804,362.59. The amount of the tax to be received from 
 the 15-mill tax on the two lists are, 1908 $11,892.62; 1909 
 $26,141.58, not including that payable to the towns. 
 
 It is shown, herewith, that the amount to be received from 
 taxes on the oyster franchise in the State's jurisdiction has been 
 increased $14,248.96 over that of the previous year. After very 
 careful deliberation the Board of Equalization is of the opinion 
 that the assessed valuations per acre, which have been given to 
 the different lots held under the special franchise as shown on 
 the maps which accompany this report, represent a fair equalized 
 valuation of such franchises. 
 
 MINIMUM VALUATION OF OYSTER GROUNDS. 
 
 Oyster ground in Connecticut is held under what is known 
 as the perpetual franchise system. An applicant is obliged to 
 sign an application (see page 103) in which he states that he 
 "wishes and intends to use said ground for planting and 
 
 CULTIVATING SHELL-FISH." 
 
 The next step in the procedure is the making of a grant (see 
 page 104) in which the Commissioners grant the grounds covered 
 by the application, giving detailed description of the same, and 
 in which the statements in the application are found to be true 
 and the ground granted in accordance with such statements, and 
 the fact is again expressed in the grant as in the application, 
 that the applicant wishes and intends to use said ground for 
 planting and cultivating shell-fish. In the grant there is also 
 the proviso that the grantee or holder of said ground "shall 
 actually use and occupy the same for the purposes named in good 
 faith within five years from the date of the grant." This latter 
 provision is in accordance with the provisions of section 3219 
 of the General Statutes, in which it is expressly provided that 
 upon petition to the superior court, the Commissioners may cause 
 grounds not ,used and occupied in good faith to revert to the 
 State. 
 
 Manifestly all applications which have been granted have been 
 upon the express understanding, that the grounds covered thereby 
 should be occupied for the purpose of planting and cultivating 
 shell-fish. If they are so occupied, or have been, and the char- 
 
2 2 MINIMUM VALUATION OF OYSTER GROUNDS. 
 
 acter of the ground is such as to make future occupation reason- 
 ably probable, then a minimum valuation, for instance, of $5.00 
 an acre, is not unreasonable; for if ground is of any value what- 
 ever for the purposes of oyster culture, it must be worth that 
 figure, which would mean under the rate of taxation now in 
 force only seven and one-half cents per acre per annum in the 
 way of a tax. 
 
 If, as some parties contend, the ground is of no value what- 
 ever, and cannot be made valuable except by the outlay of 
 money, in the way of hardening said ground by depositing 
 thereon sand or other hardening material, then the statement 
 in the application that the applicant wished and intended to use 
 said ground for planting and cultivating shell-fish was mislead- 
 ing, for the wish and intention were so vague (unless indeed the 
 applicant could show that he had made arrangements definitely 
 for having material placed on the ground) as to be a mere con- 
 tingency and not a wish or an intent at all. 
 
 Grounds which are known to be black mud, for instance, and 
 which have always been of that character, and which in all human 
 probability will never be anything different except by artificial 
 hardening, of course, cannot be termed reasonably suitable for 
 planting and cultivating shell-fish, and any one taking up and 
 holding for years such grounds under such a grant as has been 
 referred to, cannot be said to be acting in good faith. 
 
 The amount of revenue which the State of Connecticut derives 
 from grounds of this character, as compared with the total, is 
 insignificant, and the question must present itself whether or 
 not the taxation of this ground at a sufficient figure to test 
 the good faith of the former applicant and present holder is 
 desirable. 
 
 If a person holding for instance several thousands of acres 
 of such grounds should say that he intended to harden them, 
 the carrying out of any such intention would be a manifest 
 impossibility, as there is not sufficient amount of material avail- 
 able for this purpose to harden any considerable amount in any 
 given territory. 
 
 Growers can tell how much they have hardened, but none 
 have ever claimed to have improved any great amount ; indeed the 
 representations have always been that growers had all the ground 
 they needed without hardening any more. 
 
PUBLIC HEARINGS. 23 
 
 PUBLIC HEARINGS. 
 
 Following the meetings of the Board when acting as a board 
 of relief, public hearings were held on February 18, 1910, in 
 Bridgeport; March 18, in South Norwalk; April 8, in New 
 Haven, pursuant to the following notice. 
 
 Hartford, Conn. 
 The State Board of Equalization, acting as a Commission 
 to investigate the oyster properties, will hold a public hearing 
 at Bridgeport, etc., to which it invites owners of oyster properties 
 and natural growthers in this State to be present, to give their 
 views relative to the conditions prevailing in the protection and 
 taxation of such properties; to the production thereof, and 
 the revenue therefrom ; the present policy of the State towards 
 the same and desirable changes therein. 
 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 Board of Equalization and Oyster 
 Investigation Commission. 
 
 A copy of this notice was sent to every holder of ground 
 under franchise, and to every natural growther in the State. 
 There was a very good attendance at all the meetings. The dis- 
 cussion of the oyster industry in its relation to the State was 
 free and frank, and participated in by nearly all the leading 
 private growers, and a goodly number of the natural growthers. 
 
 The attitude of these men toward the Board, both in their 
 manner and remarks, was very cordial, and they freely answered 
 all questions. They expressed themselves as being ready and 
 perfectly willing to pay any fair tax to the State, which was 
 equally and equitably determined, taking into consideration the 
 expense of experimentization and the vicissitudes of the business. 
 They emphasized particularly, however, their right to certain 
 definite protection from the State in return for the taxes paid. 
 They ask for judicial interpretation or additional legislation 
 which will prevent depredations and encroachments upon their 
 rights, and also immediate and practical legislative action, which 
 will begin the purification of the polluted rivers, harbors, and 
 coastal waters, which are so well adapted to the oyster industry. 
 
 While the business has grown from its first beginnings to a 
 large volume, it is actually and seriously endangered at the pres- 
 ent time because of the continued and increased contamination 
 
24 PECULIARITIES OF THE CONNECTICUT OYSTER INDUSTRY. 
 
 of oyster beds by sewage and the waste product of factories. 
 The growers maintain that this condition should be improved, 
 not only to safeguard the present business, but to develop it 
 to much larger proportions, which would result in an increase 
 in the amount of oysters grown and in the value of the franchises, 
 and a consequent development of the taxable property on shore. 
 In addition such action would prevent the extermination of fish 
 and other sea food which cannot live in the polluted waters, and 
 finally, they claim, that the continuation of such contamination 
 is a positive menace to the health of the rapidly growing popula- 
 tion which lives along the shores of the Sound. 
 
 As stated by one large oyster grower "the matter of increased 
 taxation is a mere bagatelle in its relation to the oyster industry, 
 as compared to the great question of the removal of the causes 
 of contamination which so seriously menace the use of a large 
 amount of ground of very great adaptability to oyster culture." 
 
 PECULIARITIES OF THE CONNECTICUT OYSTER 
 
 INDUSTRY. 
 
 There are certain peculiar conditions connected with the 
 growing of oysters in Connecticut waters. Originally there was a 
 moderate supply of oysters on the natural beds which seemed to 
 be sufficient for the small demand. When an increased supply 
 was necessary the growers commenced the cultivation of oysters 
 on land secured under the franchise law. This industry, which 
 began a little before 1880, has continued with large increase in 
 developments, many vicissitudes, and many remarkable successes 
 until the present day. 
 
 Originally the seed was grown and the oysters were matured 
 in Connecticut waters. After a while, however, it became evi- 
 dent, because of certain unexpected experiences, that the oysters 
 grew more satisfactorily and reached a better condition for mar- 
 ket if transferred to oyster grounds in Rhode Island or on the 
 Long Island Shores. The violent storms and accompanying 
 gales on the open Sound, occasionally, caused great loss of 
 oysters, but the principal reasons for the transfer to other 
 grounds was, as stated above, because of the appearance of a 
 green color in the oysters. This is supposed to be caused by a 
 vegetable substance, although some oystermen claim it is caused 
 
PECULIARITIES OF THE CONNECTICUT OYSTER INDUSTRY. 2$ 
 
 by the contamination of the waters by shore industries. In any 
 event, the green appearance makes the oysters less desirable for 
 market and forces the growers to transfer them to other grounds 
 for maturing. While it is not claimed that the green color makes 
 the oysters unhealthful, the trade will not buy them. As one 
 consumer said, "Don't send me another green oyster, send me 
 some ripe ones." 
 
 In addition, the transfer from one locality to another seems 
 to hasten the development and to produce a more attractive oyster 
 in every way for the market. The result is that a very large 
 portion of the cultivated oyster grounds in Connecticut are used 
 for raising seed and for growing oysters for two or three years 
 prior to the transfer. There are certain firms, however, who 
 have continued to leave the oysters in Connecticut waters up to 
 the time of catching for opening purposes. This happens at 
 Stony Creek, New Haven, and possibly other places west of 
 those points where the green color is not evident. 
 
 Further, the contamination of the streams and harbors by 
 sewage and waste from factories has made it absolutely neces- 
 sary to transfer oysters from many beds to purer waters before 
 they are opened. The Connecticut waters are very uncertain in 
 producing a set as compared with those in some other states, and 
 on some parts of the oyster grounds in this State there has not 
 been a set for several years. 
 
 In spite, however, of the above uncertainties it is well known 
 that seed oysters from Connecticut grounds are the most desir- 
 able of all in the estimation of the scientific oyster growers. 
 This oyster seed, if properly transferred to suitable waters, pro- 
 duces the best oysters in size, appearance, and taste, and they 
 command a good price throughout the country. Practically all 
 the celebrated Blue Point oysters are grown from Connecticut 
 seed. Nearly all the oysters opened or shucked in this State are 
 oysters that were originally started in Connecticut waters, from 
 Connecticut seed, transferred to Long Island or Rhode Island 
 for a varying period of several months, and brought back again 
 to the Connecticut opening houses to be shucked and shipped to 
 different parts of the country. 
 
 All the above facts should be taken into consideration in com- 
 paring Connecticut conditions, both as to production and revenue 
 with those of any other state. 
 
26 COMPARISON WITH RHODE ISLAND. 
 
 COMPARISON WITH RHODE ISLAND. 
 
 Considerable has been said in Connecticut public prints rela- 
 tive to the oyster grounds of Connecticut as compared with those 
 of Rhode Island, both in their productivity, and the revenue 
 derived therefrom. Investigation by this Board has convinced 
 it that the conditions in the two states are quite different. 
 
 In Connecticut, there are 31,060 acres which are cultivated 
 and which vary in value from $15.00 to $150.00 per acre. Of 
 these there are 489 acres assessed at $150.00 per acre ; 3,754 acres 
 at $100.00 per acre ; 5,458 acres at $75.00 ; 5,264 acres at $50.00 ; 
 7,434 acres at $25.00; 8,661 acres at $10.00. There are also 
 38,679 acres of ground not cultivated because of mud or other 
 reasons. The Connecticut grounds vary greatly in their value 
 on account of their location, nature of the bottom, depth of water, 
 freedom from contamination, and general productivity. Con- 
 necticut has followed the policy of selling a perpetual franchise 
 on these oyster grounds. 
 
 Rhode Island has not adopted the policy of selling franchises, 
 but has retained the ownership of all their oyster grounds, and 
 has leased certain of the same for a period not less than five nor 
 more than ten years, subject to renewal at the expiration of said 
 period. The total ground thus leased in Rhode Island under 
 such conditions January 1, 1910, was 16,814.7 acres. For all 
 such ground where the water is of the depth of less than 12 feet 
 at average low water, the annual rental is $10 per acre. For all 
 grounds where the water is of the depth of at least 12 feet, at the 
 average at low water, the annual rental is not less than $5.00 per 
 acre. The leased ground is divided as follows: 5,561.9 acres at 
 $10.00 per acre, yielding an annual rental of $55,619, and 
 11,252.8 acres that is leased at $5.00 per acre, or an annual rental 
 of $56,264, making a total of $111,883 P er annum which Rhode 
 Island thus receives. Compared with the revenue from Connect- 
 icut this is certainly a large sum. Rhode Island is able to secure 
 this revenue for the following reasons ; the use of the leasing 
 system instead of private ownership ; the uniform good quality 
 and fertility of the grounds ; the peculiar nature of the Narra- 
 gansett Bay waters, due possibly to the amount of fresh water 
 which flows into the Bay, thereby decreasing the salty and other- 
 wise disagreeable condition pertaining to oyster cultivation in 
 
COMPARISON WITH RHODE ISLAND. 27 
 
 less favored waters ; entire absence of any green appearance ; the 
 protection afforded by the Bay; the removal of contaminating 
 substances and the strict laws against pollution of streams and 
 harbors ; and the convenient depth of the water for cultiva- 
 tion. Nearly all these desirable qualities are lacking in Connect- 
 icut waters, and it is impossible, therefore, to compare the two 
 industries on the same basis in considering the revenue derived 
 therefrom. 
 
 The oyster growers who lease the Rhode Island grounds have 
 no investment which is represented by the grounds themselves. 
 They incur no expense on account of experimental hardening and 
 consequently they are not obliged to make an annual interest 
 charge against the investment, their total expense being the rental 
 fee. The comparative cost of the best ground in Connecticut 
 which may be similar to the best ground in Rhode Island would 
 be represented on an assessed valuation of $150.00 per acre by 
 the interest on the investment at 5 per cent., which would amount 
 to $7.50, plus the tax at a rate of i^A per cent., amounting to $2.25, 
 or a total annual charge of $9.75 per acre as against the total 
 charge of $10.00 in Rhode Island. The land assessed at $100.00 
 on a similar computation would show fixed charges of $6.50 per 
 acre, and the land assessed at $75.00 would show fixed charges 
 of $4.87 per acre, which would be comparatively lower than the 
 land leased for $5.00 per acre in Rhode Island. All land 
 assessed at a less figure than $75.00 per acre would bear fixed 
 charges considerably less than the annual minimum Rhode Island 
 rental, but such land is supposed to be much less desirable in 
 every particular. 
 
 The preceding statement is made not so much for the purpose 
 of confirming the assessed valuations adopted by the Board as to 
 show a definite comparison of the conditions and charges in the 
 two states. 
 
 The Connecticut Shell-Fish Commission in their report for 
 the year ending September, 1901, made the following statement 
 relative to receipts from Rhode Island oyster grounds as com- 
 pared with those in Connecticut : 
 
 "The sudden rise in the receipts of Rhode Island from these 
 sources was contemporaneous with the appreciation by Connecti- 
 cut growers of the fact that the advantages of maturing seed 
 oysters for the market in Narragansett Bay were very great, and 
 
28 COMPARISON WITH RHODE ISLAND. 
 
 that they could make money by transferring their young oysters 
 from their Connecticut beds to Rhode Island waters, notwithstand- 
 ing the expense of the transfer and the high charges in that state 
 for the use of the grounds. 
 
 "No intelligent man need be told that Connecticut planters 
 of long experience in the business would not have made this 
 change and incurred this extra expense and trouble had there been 
 like inducements at home. But Connecticut has no such facilities 
 to offer. Were it possible for Connecticut growers to mature 
 their seed oysters at home in the same time as in Narragansett 
 Bay, they would gladly pay the same price to Connecticut for the 
 privilege and save themselves the expense of the long haul and 
 transfer. But Connecticut has no grounds located as are those 
 of Rhode Island and so favorable for the rapid development of 
 the young oyster to a marketable state. While Connecticut 
 matures the best oysters in the world, Rhode Island can mature 
 them quicker. 
 
 "How long these favorable conditions will last on the Rhode 
 Island oyster grounds it is impossible to judge at present. But 
 be that as it may, the whole matter resolves itself into the fact 
 that Rhode Island offers inducements now which Connecticut does 
 not and cannot, and for which Connecticut growers are willing to 
 pay the increased price. 
 
 "From the general situation of the grounds in the two states 
 those in Rhode Island may be likened to the small but valuable 
 'garden spot,' while the Connecticut grounds represent the broad 
 'farm lands' with the mixture of 'good, bad, and indifferent' 
 of the average agricultural district." 
 
 OYSTER SET. 
 
 The Connecticut waters have not been so reliable in produc- 
 ing an oyster set as those of Rhode Island and some other states. 
 No data available to the public have been collated to show the 
 conditions and causes which prevent the regularity of set. 
 
 The following table, which has been prepared from the 
 reports of the Shell-Fish Commission, gives a fair idea of the 
 occurrence of the set during the years since i< 
 
 1888 No set 1895 Set. 
 
 1889 " " 1896 " 
 
 1890 Set. 1897 " 
 
 1891 " 1898 No set. 
 
 1892 " 1899 Set. 
 
 1893 " 1900 " 
 
 1894 " 1901 No set. 
 
OYSTER SET. 29 
 
 1902 No set. 1907 Set almost a failure. 
 
 1903 " " 1908 Fair set, but not of good vitality. 
 
 1904 Very good and general set. 1909 Fair set. 
 
 1905 Scattering and uneven. 1910 No general set. 
 
 1906 Set almost a failure. 
 
 Sufficient tests should be made and reports received every 
 summer relative to temperature of water and other possible 
 influences to make it clear, under what conditions a good set is 
 secured, and under what conditions there is no set. In the years 
 when there is no set the oyster growers are obliged to rely for 
 their marketing product upon oysters of other years, thus mak- 
 ing seed from previous sets fill the demand for the market. This 
 requires, in some cases, the sale of smaller oysters than would 
 have been marketed under ordinary conditions. 
 
 FUTURE DISPOSITION OF CONNECTICUT OYSTER 
 
 GROUND. 
 
 The Board is convinced that the present system of allotting 
 oyster ground in the State's jurisdiction under a perpetual fran- 
 chise is entirely antagonistic to the interests of the State. As 
 stated previously, Connecticut is the only state which permits 
 such a disposition to be made. Our nearest neighbor, Rhode 
 Island, has shown conclusively the wisdom which she employed 
 in adopting a leasing system and the resulting advantage to the 
 State. It has enabled her to share in the prosperous development 
 of the oyster industry which is carried on in Narragansett Bay. 
 
 This is shown by the following statement of the gross 
 receipts received by Rhode Island for rents of oyster grounds 
 since 1864, when the office of the Commissioners of Shell- 
 Fisheries was established: 
 
 1864 $ 61.00 
 
 1867 1,568.50 
 
 1877 6,045.25 
 
 1887 8,649.00 
 
 1899 13,558.46 
 
 1901 25,767.38 
 
 1904 45.252.58 
 
 1907 85,321.13 
 
 1910 111,883.00 (Estimated) 
 
3<3 FUTURE LEASING SYSTEM. 
 
 In Connecticut, many thousands of acres of what is now very- 
 valuable oyster ground has been secured under perpetual fran- 
 chises from the State by the payment of one dollar per acre. 
 These franchises may be sold, and are transferred in practically 
 the same manner as real property. In addition, many other acres 
 of ground, which were taken up on the payment of one dollar per 
 acre by private owners, have not been improved nor developed 
 for the very reason that the owners of these franchises were too 
 much occupied with the development of other acreage. 
 
 The result has been that a considerable amount of such land 
 held as a part of a large acreage by private owners is practically 
 in the same condition as when it was first taken up. 
 
 If, however, some of this land could have been leased to 
 others interested in the oyster industry, or who were anxious to go 
 into the business, it might have been possible to have secured a 
 scientific development and cultivation of such land, which would 
 have increased its value both to the State and to the individual. 
 The Board definitely recommends that the law be so amended that 
 all land in the State's jurisdiction outside the town lines, which is 
 not already allotted to private owners, and all land which shall be 
 given up by those now holding the same under franchises, shall 
 in the future be given out under a new application on a lease, 
 basis for a term of from five to ten years, with the option of 
 renewal subject to a definite annual rental payment, and to be 
 under the control and direction of the Shell-Fish Commissioners. 
 
 OYSTER POLICE. 
 
 At the session of 1895 a law was passed authorizing the Com- 
 missioners to appoint five or more persons to act as oyster police. 
 The expense has been approximately three thousand dollars per 
 year, and the policing has been done by districts, there being six, 
 reaching from Branford to Greenwich. The amounts allotted to 
 each district vary in accordance with the assessed value of the 
 oyster ground ; the largest amount being for the New Haven 
 district, the second largest for Bridgeport. 
 
 In no case is the oyster police wholly compensated by the 
 State, and, in all the districts but one, they are individuals in the 
 employ of private growers or bodies of private growers and are 
 paid principally by them, and do the work for the State as an 
 
OYSTER POLICE. 31 
 
 incident. In fact while the men are nominally in the employ of 
 the State, in all cases but one the men's names are suggested by 
 the employer, who pays the principal sum, and is a member of a 
 committee of growers in that district. The appointments are 
 made solely on such recommendations. 
 
 This system is merely a form of private watching and it 
 would be fully as effective if the Commissioners were empowered 
 to vest these private watchmen with police powers and then to 
 turn over the money directly to the man in each district by whom 
 the watchman is principally compensated. Such a system is not 
 effective and is nothing more or less than a waste of the State's 
 money. The objections to this method are many. The most that 
 is claimed for it is that the police constitute a sort of scarecrow, 
 but if there are those who desire to steal oysters or commit other 
 offences against the shell-fish laws, it is obvious that all they 
 need to do is to do the job in pairs — one man to watch the police 
 and the other to steal the oysters, and then get together after- 
 wards and "divide the swag." 
 
 In no case is it possible for the oyster police to properly cover 
 his district with any facilities that are afforded him by the State. 
 For example, in the district of Xew Haven, which pays $75.00 
 per month for oyster police, it would be physically impossible for 
 the man on duty to sail over all the ground which he is supposed 
 to police in one night providing he had fair wind all the time. 
 There is power on his boat, but the engine is so small that it is 
 of little use except possibly to get him home in case the boat is 
 becalmed. 
 
 If the State is to do effective oyster policing, boats should be 
 provided capable of covering the territory in each case, and if 
 this were done it would require a sum larger in amount than is 
 received from taxes on all shell-fish grounds, to say nothing 
 about the expense of salaries, maintenance, etc. 
 
 The system that the Board seriously recommends as a substi- 
 tute is to repeal the law providing state police and to provide a 
 bounty large enough to make it an object for any boat which 
 happens to be on the Sound to do oyster police work. 
 
 INSPECTORS OF MUD DUMPING. 
 
 There is a provision in the statutes that persons or corpora- 
 tions dredging mud or refuse material by boat from any harbor 
 
32 p INSPECTORS OF MUD DUMPING. 
 
 in this State wherein or south of which oyster grounds are 
 located and designated, shall notify the Commissioners of their 
 intention to dump material, and that the Commissioners shall 
 designate suitable places where the material may be so dumped 
 and shall appoint inspectors to accompany the boat. This pro- 
 vision does not apply to any work authorized to be done by the 
 United States government. 
 
 No authority is given these inspectors, and they simply ride 
 up and down on the boats with no power to interfere, if an 
 attempt were made to dump otherwise than in accordance with 
 the instructions. It is a little difficult to see how they are sup- 
 posed to earn their $2.50 per day, except in cases where they 
 would be convenient witnesses in disputes as to an alleged dump. 
 
 In case of dumping hard material on oyster beds, the owner 
 of the beds employs and pays his own inspector, and it is only 
 when the material goes to the public dumping ground, and the 
 work is not authorized by the United States government, that 
 these inspectors are employed and paid by the State. This 
 expenditure cannot be justified. The amount appropriated is 
 $250 per year, but the amount actually expended has never been 
 less than $400 per year, and in some years has been as high as 
 $1,600. This expenditure, it should be remembered, is for the 
 employment of individuals who are vested with no authority 
 whatever by the statute and who can do nothing except report 
 any injury done to private individuals. It has never been claimed 
 that the State had any interest whatever in the matter. 
 
 It is perfectly obvious that these inspectors ought to be 
 appointed by the State and vested with the same authority that 
 United States dumping inspectors have under the federal 
 statutes, and that they should be paid by the parties doing the 
 work. The most convenient method probably would be that of 
 having the expense of the inspection included in the original con- 
 tract and paid by the contractor as part of the job in each case. 
 
 The following table shows the cost of dumping inspectors 
 since i< 
 
 1886 
 
 $387.50 
 
 1891 
 
 $ 67.50 
 
 1887 
 
 440.78 
 
 1892 
 
 612.50 
 
 1888 
 
 532.50 
 
 1893-94 
 
 2,090.69 
 
 1889 
 
 465-85 
 
 1895 
 
 205.00 
 
 1890 
 
 932.50 
 
 1896 
 
 797-44 
 

 BUOYING. 
 
 
 i8 9 7 
 
 $1,195.91 
 
 1904 
 
 $ 318.67 
 
 1898 
 
 404.40 
 
 1905 
 
 1,685.07 
 
 1899 
 
 1,314.61 
 
 1906 
 
 1,209.51 
 
 1900 
 
 403.60 
 
 1907 
 
 426.84 
 
 1901 
 
 303.84 
 
 1908 
 
 418.70 
 
 1902 
 
 37-50 
 
 1909 
 
 740.00 
 
 1903 
 
 807.80 
 
 1910 
 
 601.70 
 
 33 
 
 Total, $16,400.41 
 
 The Board definitely recommends the amendment of the 
 statute relative to dumping so that the expense of the inspectors 
 shall be paid by the contractors. 
 
 BUOYING. 
 
 It is provided by statute that certain natural beds, four in 
 number, shall be buoyed by the State. There is also a provision 
 that the Commissioners shall not expend for that purpose a sum 
 exceeding one-half the amount received for licenses during the 
 preceding year. Inasmuch as specific amounts have been appro- 
 priated for buoying the beds, and as the amounts specified in the 
 statute would be ridiculously small in many instances to do the 
 work properly, it has always been assumed that the Legislature, 
 by appropriating a specific sum, repealed by implication the 
 language in the statute referred to. The amount which is 
 expended is substantially $1,200 per year. This amount has 
 increased about $200 annually in the last few years on account 
 of the increase in the cost of buoys and in the charges for the use 
 of steamer, etc. 
 
 The only persons who are benefited by buoying the natural 
 beds are the owners of private ground adjoining. It is obvious 
 that if they kept up their buoys in accordance with the statute 
 which provides that each owner shall buoy his corners, and these 
 private buoys were accurately set, it would be unnecessary for the 
 State to maintain another line of buoys exactly in the same 
 places. It is hard to see any reasonable justification for this 
 great expense by the State, when it is considered that the money 
 is taken from general taxation and, as has been said, benefits only 
 such owners as happen to hold ground adjoining the natural bed. 
 
 The expense for buoying and inspecting the natural beds has 
 been more than double the amount received for licenses from the 
 
34 BUOYING. 
 
 natural growthers since the license system was established. The 
 amount thus received for licenses is the only revenue received by 
 the State from the immensely valuable property called the 
 "natural beds," and to spend the whole of this sum for buoying, 
 leaving no revenue to the State from this source, is a system 
 which cannot be defended, to say nothing of expending as much 
 more from the small amount derived from taxes. 
 
 The license fees were raised during the season of 1907 and it 
 was thought that the amount received would be large enough so 
 that no deficit would occur on this account, and that has been 
 true in the years when there has been a set on the beds, but 
 during the present year the amount received for licenses has been 
 only about $700, which is but a little more than one-half enough 
 to provide the expense of buoying. 
 
 The buoying cannot be effectively done for any less amount 
 than is now expended for this purpose, and the question is 
 whether the State shall maintain the present system or do away 
 with the buoying altogether. 
 
 The cost of buoying since 1895 has been as follows : 
 
 1895 
 
 $ 390.85 
 
 1903 
 
 $ 633.40 
 
 1896 
 
 570.83 
 
 1904 
 
 696.20 
 
 1897 
 
 861.24 
 
 1905 
 
 1,001.24 
 
 1898 
 
 703.34 
 
 1906 
 
 895-05 
 
 1899 
 
 1,876.42 
 
 1907 
 
 932.50 
 
 1900 
 
 1,134.85 
 
 1908 
 
 1,10445 
 
 1901 
 
 1,545-99 
 
 1909 
 
 1,116.70 
 
 1902 
 
 957-86 
 
 1910 
 
 1,237-30 
 
 Total, $15,658.22 
 The receipts from licenses during the same period have been 
 
 $11,179.00, showing a deficit on the cost of buoying alone of 
 
 $3,479.22. 
 
 The Board definitely recommends the repeal of the law 
 
 requiring buoys to be set at the expense of the State. 
 
 PROVISIONS GOVERNING OWNERSHIP AND 
 
 TAXATION OF OYSTER PROPERTIES 
 
 IN DIFFERENT STATES. 
 
 A digest of the laws of the oyster-producing states which 
 shows their methods of taxation of oyster ground, and, in many 
 instances, of the oysters themselves, is given herewith. 
 
METHODS OF TAXATION. 35 
 
 It will be seen that Connecticut is the only state that has 
 granted a perpetual franchise ownership of oyster ground. In all 
 the others any rights to the use of the ground are based upon 
 a leasing system, instead of on that of absolute ownership. 
 Several states require a definite bushel tax in addition to the 
 annual payment under the lease. 
 
 CONNECTICUT. 
 
 Method of Taxation. 
 
 Fifteen-mill tax on the assessed valuation of the oyster 
 ground franchise owned by planters. Natural growthers 
 required to have a boat license, which is $5.00 for a boat 
 under 5 tons, and $1.50 for each additional ton when a boat 
 exceeds five tons. 
 
 DELAWARE. 
 
 Method of Taxation. 
 
 Tonnage rate on boats of over nine tons is $2.50 per ton ; 
 entitles individuals to use of 50 acres. Tax on 50 acres is 
 $25.00 in addition to tonnage tax. Less than 9 tons $2.50 
 per ton, with 25 acres, on which a tax of $15.00 per year is 
 paid. 
 
 Individuals are entitled to use of land so long as tax 
 and tonnage rate is paid. 
 
 FLORIDA. 
 
 No statute taxing oyster lands. 
 
 LOUISIANA. 
 
 Method of Taxation. 
 
 Privilege tax 3c per bbl. Canning license, varying from 
 $10.00 to $100.00 according to number of steam boxes used, 
 shuckers employed, or amount of oysters handled. License 
 for boats from $10.00 to $25.00; also a tonnage license of 
 50c in addition. Land leased for $1.00 per acre annually. 
 
 MAINE. 
 
 No taxation of oyster property. 
 
 MARYLAND. 
 
 Method of Taxation. 
 
 Leases to citizens of State only, at rate of not less than 
 $1.00 per acre. Limit of leases 20 years. $1.00 per acre for 
 2 years ; $2.00 for 3d year ; $3.00 for 4th year ; $4.00 for 5th 
 year ; $5.00 per year for balance of 20 years. In addition to 
 the above there is a bushel tax on oysters bought and sold. 
 
36 METHODS OF TAXATION. 
 
 MASSACHUSETTS. 
 Method of Taxation. 
 
 No special laws relative to taxation of oyster lands. 
 Probably would be taxed under general laws applicable to 
 , taxation of other property. 
 
 NEW JERSEY. 
 
 Method of Taxation. 
 
 Leases to citizens of State only at rate of not less than 
 25c per acre. The lowest rate is $.50' and in one district 
 $1.00. Grounds are leased for catching seed at rate of $3.00 
 per acre per annum. In one district there is a boat license, 
 or tonnage tax, ranging from $5.00 to $50.00, rated $2.50 per 
 ton. 
 
 NEW YORK. 
 
 Method of Taxation. 
 
 Flat tax by the acre upon all shell-fish lands (with 
 some exceptions) of 25c per acre, except where taxed through 
 ordinary channels by the towns, in addition to an annual 
 rental of not less than $2.00 per acre. In certain towns, 
 leased to highest bidder at auction. 
 
 NORTH CAROLINA. 
 Method of Taxation. 
 
 Subject to lease by the year. Rental of $1.00 per acre 
 annually. 
 
 RHODE ISLAND. 
 
 Method of Taxation. 
 
 No special tax on oyster lands. Land leased to planters. 
 Neither land nor oysters are taxed by the State. Oysters 
 are personal property and might be taxed as such, but no 
 case is known of such action. $10.00 per acre where water 
 is less than 12 ft., and $5.00 per acre where water is over 
 12 ft., annually. 
 
 TEXAS. 
 
 Method of Taxation. 
 
 Rental system, but no direct taxation. 15c per acre for 
 part of year ; 25c per acre for next four years, and 75c after- 
 wards. 2c per bbl. for oysters taken from either public or 
 private beds, and a license system. 
 
METHODS OF TAXATION. 37 
 
 VIRGINIA. 
 
 Method of Taxation. 
 
 Ground leased at an annual rental of $1.00 per acre. 
 
 EARLY TAXATION. 
 
 The taxation of the oyster properties has been a live issue, 
 apparently, since the creation of the Connecticut Board of 
 Shell-Fish Commissioners in 1881. The following extracts from 
 different reports of the Commission show their opinions of the 
 difficulties and uncertainties of the present method of taxing the 
 oyster franchises based on the value of land from one to twenty 
 fathoms under water. 
 
 EXTRACT FROM FIRST ANNUAL REPORT OF THE SHELL- 
 FISH COMMISSIONERS. 
 January Session 1882. 
 
 RECOMMENDING A METHOD OF TAXATION. 
 
 Another class of oystermen advised that a tax shall be raised 
 in the form of a license to be paid by every one cultivating state 
 beds, proportionate to the size of the beds. Another class recom- 
 mended a tax upon the annual product of the beds. A paper 
 signed by 123 oystermen of Norwalk, presented to the Com- 
 missioners, recommends that all the lands should be subject to a 
 reasonable pro rata tax. 
 
 Many other suggestions have been made; but after weighing, 
 carefully, everything brought to their attention, the Commis- 
 sioners have reached the conclusion that there is no good reason 
 for departing from the usual methods of the State in laying and 
 collecting a tax not only upon the grounds but also upon the 
 oysters growing thereon. An oyster farm is analogous to a 
 cattle farm. By law, the land of the latter is taxed on its assessed 
 value, and so are the cattle, young and old, and they are taxed 
 every year. No one questions the propriety of the tax, and the 
 Commissioners see no reason why oyster grounds and the oysters 
 that feed thereon, young and old, should not be taxed in like 
 manner. 
 
 They respectfully submit, therefore, that the grounds under 
 state control and the products of the grounds should be 
 assessed annually, and a tax laid on the assessed value should 
 be made payable on the first day of October in each year ; values 
 to be ascertained from sworn lists subject to investigation and 
 revision when deemed necessary. Every owner should be 
 required to deliver his list to some proper officer on or before 
 
38 EARLY TAXATION. 
 
 some day to be determined, and on failure so to do the said 
 officer should be authorized to make up such list as he may be 
 able, on which a double rate of tax should be levied. 
 
 EXTRACT FROM SECOND ANNUAL REPORT OF THE SHELL- 
 FISH COMMISSIONERS. 
 
 THE FIRST TAXING YEAR. 
 
 There is another important fact which bears upon this sub- 
 ject, one to which the Commissioners feel constrained to call 
 particular attention : By law all owners are required to file with 
 the Commissioners a statement, under oath, wherein they shall 
 give, not only the number of acres owned by them, but also 
 the value thereof per acre. With many honorable exceptions, 
 the valuations of cultivated grounds have been set in the lists 
 at ridiculously small figures. A reasonable estimate would, 
 unquestionably, increase these figures tenfold. A comparison 
 of the lists with each other is conclusive of these under-valua- 
 tions. Adjacent lots, of like character and condition in every 
 respect, are valued, one, five, ten, or fifteen times more than the 
 other, and this simply because one owner has a better moral 
 sense than another. Some men deem it commendable to deceive 
 the tax gatherer. They do not seem to realize the fact that in 
 doing so they commit perjury and rob the State. So great were 
 the differences in the valuation of grounds given in the lists, the 
 Commissioners were compelled to perform a great amount of 
 labor before they could approximate to reasonable equalization 
 of values ; and in doing this the figures were largely increased, 
 and yet not without great misgiving in many cases that the 
 increased valuation was not as high as it ought to be. The 
 novelty of the work making an entire new list without any 
 previous list for a guide, and the difficulty experienced in pro- 
 curing information except from parties directly or indirectly 
 interested, forced the Commissioners to place the estimates below, 
 rather than above, the true valuation. 
 
 The plea, so often heard, that the oyster industry of the 
 State is in its infancy and should, consequently, be lightly taxed, 
 is more plausible than sound. It is true the industry is in its 
 infancy, but the infant has had a gigantic development and 
 growth, and is fully able to bear its fair share of public burdens. 
 The pioneers of deep water planting have been so long and so con- 
 spicuously successful that their business must be regarded as 
 established. The many who have more recently embarked in the 
 business have doubtless been prompted so to do by the reasonable 
 prospect of a like success. In view of the cheapness of grounds, 
 and the moderate cost of cultivating, the net profits must be con- 
 sidered large. It is admitted that there are risks in the business, and 
 
EARLY TAXATION. 39 
 
 that serious losses sometimes arise from storms, noxious animals, 
 and other causes ; but the chances of profit are not thereby 
 materially diminished. In the long run the results are quite as 
 gratifying as are those of the best mercantile or manufacturing 
 industries. This is corroborated by the experience of those who 
 have been longest in the business in this State, and also of most 
 of the Rhode Island cultivators. The grocer or butcher just 
 starting in a business where he has invested his capital, it may 
 be his all, would not think of asking any reduction or exemption 
 from tax, because his business was in its infancy. He knows that 
 whatever property he owns is subject to taxation, regardless of 
 the risks attendant upon its investment. And so it is with the 
 oyster growers ; there is no valid reason why property should 
 not be fairly appraised and a fair tax raised thereon. Judging 
 from the lists which have been presented for this year's taxes, 
 it is believed that a better view of this subject begins to prevail 
 among the oystermen. 
 
 EXTRACT FROM FOURTH REPORT OF THE SHELL-FISH 
 COMMISSIONERS. 
 
 DIFFICULTIES OF ASSESSMENT. 
 
 In making the valuation of oyster grounds the Commissioners 
 believe that not a lot has been overestimated. It is difficult for 
 the uninitiated to appreciate the obstacles that must be overcome 
 before reaching a just conclusion about the value of any sub- 
 marine lot. 
 
 Could the waters covering a lot be made to recede, and lay 
 bare the bottom so that one might observe its true suitableness 
 for the cultivation of oysters, their work then would not be half 
 done. The depth of water, the various currents that flow over 
 the ground, the quantity of food likely to be found there for the 
 growing stock, its exposure to the attacks of stars and other 
 marine enemies — all these elements are necessary to the for- 
 mation of a correct estimate of value. 
 
 Their estimates of value have generally been received with 
 approval, and the taxes based thereon have been promptly paid 
 by the great majority of owners. There were some complaints 
 which were presented, not only to the Commissioners personally, 
 but also through the public press, with considerable acrimony; 
 but the Commissioners did not deem it necessary to defend a 
 work which commended itself to all impartial men. Persons who 
 purchase more ground than they can cultivate, who hold large 
 areas for speculative purposes, ought not to be relieved of their 
 fair burden of tax because they reap no immediate benefit from 
 their holdings. And yet this is the class of men, generally, who 
 
40 EARLY TAXATION. 
 
 have been loudest in their complaints. When compared with the 
 valuations of oyster grounds in town jurisdiction and the tax 
 laid thereon by town officers, the state tax laid by the Com- 
 missioners seems trifling. 
 
 EXTRACT FROM THE SEVENTH REPORT OF THE SHELL- 
 FISH COMMISSIONERS. 
 October 31, 1887. 
 
 FUTILE OBJECTIONS OF LARGE OWNERS. 
 
 The State passed the tax law and made it one of the duties 
 of the Commissioner to execute it. If it is a vicious law, change 
 it; but it cannot be changed by attacking the Commissioners. 
 Wipe the Commissioners out, and the law yet stands and must 
 be enforced. Repeal the law, and it takes from the Commis- 
 sioners only a small part of their duties, and that the most 
 disagreeable part. 
 
 The promoter of this movement has 10,000 acres and upwards 
 of oyster ground. With his two steamers he cannot cultivate 
 thoroughly more than 500 acres. If he attempts more, he cannot 
 keep it clean from stars. This he has attempted, and he has 
 suffered like the rest. If his broad acres were divided up and 
 held by other parties who would be glad to cultivate them, they 
 would pay a higher tax to the State ; and what is of equally great 
 importance, would not be, as they now are, beds for unlimited 
 star breeding. 
 
 It is this failure to cultivate large holdings that makes this 
 tax seem so burdensome to owners. Let them sell off some of 
 these good grounds that they hold for speculative purposes, and 
 they will have more money and not feel the trifling tax the 
 State lays on them. 
 
 This tax, as we have seen, averages about eleven cents an 
 acre through the State. Is there any land above water in the 
 State taxed so low as this? Now, if oyster ground is worth 
 holding at all, if it is worth cultivating at all by these dissatisfied 
 holders, surely eleven cents an acre can add nothing worth con- 
 sidering to the burden of cultivation. A dozen good oysters 
 would pay the tax on each acre. 
 
 The Commissioners present the facts : It is for the State 
 to say whether or not any tax shall be raised on the grounds, 
 what it shall be, and how it shall be ascertained. The present 
 system is full of uncertainty, perplexity, and difficulty. The 
 appraisal of any property on shore is facilitated by inspection. 
 It has a reputed value among those who are in its neighborhood, 
 and a fair approximation may be secured without serious effort. 
 But these oyster lots are out of sight — in some instances twenty 
 fathoms under water. The man who knows their value best is 
 the owner, and he is not inclined to tell about it. Indeed, the 
 
NEW METHOD OF TAXATION. 4 1 
 
 greater number of oystermen fail to put a valuation on their list 
 at all. The Commissioners have some general facts bearing on 
 the question of value, obtained in various ways, but with the 
 best knowledge they can obtain they sometimes err in their esti- 
 mate, getting it either too high or too low. 
 
 It is not strange, therefore, that they have made mistakes 
 of this character. They will always be made under such a 
 system of taxation. 
 
 NEW METHOD OF TAXING OYSTER FRANCHISES. 
 
 The present system of collecting revenue from the oyster 
 ground in this State is calculated to breed injustice. No prop- 
 erty is harder to value than an oyster franchise. Of course, the 
 property on the ground is not taxed, and many different elements 
 enter into and may control the value of the ground for purposes 
 of oyster culture. Theoretical considerations are of no con- 
 sequence. The fact that the bottom is hard and apparently suit- 
 able for purposes of shell-fish culture has nothing to do with the 
 practical side of the case. There are thousands of acres of 
 hard bottom in this State where it has been proved over and 
 over again that oysters cannot live and thrive. The fact then is 
 that only by experiment can the value of a piece of ground for 
 purposes of oyster culture be determined. The experimenter 
 is the owner. It is not for his interest to disclose the value of 
 his property to the assessor. The only other means of ascer- 
 taining this fact is hearsay evidence, pure and simple. The clerk 
 of the Shell-Fish Commission, who is the assessor, is not a prac- 
 tical oysterman and never has been, and no person who has been 
 the official assessor during the history of the oyster law has 
 ever claimed to have any practical knowledge of the value of 
 the property upon which he has placed a valuation, nor any 
 information except what has come to him either from the owner 
 himself or from other persons whose opinions may or may not 
 be of value. 
 
 Complaint has been made that the assessments have been 
 unjust in some cases. The wonder is that these complaints have 
 been as few as they have been. The tribunal which then takes 
 up the matter is the Shell-Fish Commission acting as a board 
 of relief, and here again no one with any practical knowledge, or 
 claiming to have any such knowledge, sits in judgment on this 
 
42 NEW METHOD OF TAXATION. 
 
 question. The only testimony that is advanced in nine cases out 
 of ten is the testimony of interested witnesses who would be 
 more than human if they did not studiously seek to make it 
 appear that the valuation is excessive. 
 
 To apply the same rule of valuation to property out of sight, 
 which no one has an opportunity to examine except the owner 
 of it, conditions as to which are unknown and must be unknown 
 because of the fact that it would cost more to examine into them 
 than the tax would amount to, is little short of ridiculous. This 
 law seems to have been based on the taxation law as applied 
 to real property, but any one can see that the conditions are 
 totally diverse. In the case of real property it is in sight of every 
 man. It has a known selling value ascertained either by the 
 selling price of the property itself or other property similarly 
 situated. In the case of oyster ground, however, it is a signifi- 
 cant fact that very little of the best ground has changed hands 
 since the oyster law was passed in 1881, and in the few cases 
 where transfers have been made no one has known anything 
 about the actual selling price excepting the parties interested. 
 There is obviously no analogy between real property on shore and 
 oyster franchises located many feet under water, so far as plac- 
 ing the valuation upon them by taxing authorities is concerned. 
 
 NEW TAXING RECOMMENDATIONS. 
 
 The question then is, can any better system be devised ? The 
 answer is, yes. The Louisiana system has been in successful use 
 there for many years and is in all respects more logical and fairer, 
 both to the owner and to the state (see law, page 89). This plan 
 with some modifications is seriously recommended as follows : 
 
 1. Place a flat valuation on all ground under state jurisdic- 
 tion of say $10 per acre. 
 
 2. Place a productivity tax of two or three cents a bushel 
 upon all seed or other oysters taken from any grounds in this 
 State for sale, or for the purpose of removing the same out of 
 the State. 
 
 3. Require a daily report to be made by the captain or per- 
 son in charge of every boat or vessel engag'ed in dredging 
 oysters — this report to be made directly to the Shell-Fish Com- 
 mission and without inspection by the owner or manager of the 
 
NEW METHOD OF TAXATION. 43 
 
 property from which the product is taken ; also another report 
 to be made quarterly by the owner of the ground to the Com- 
 mission covering - the same field. 
 
 4. Appoint a proper number of State Inspectors, say three, 
 who have the right to go upon any oyster boat at any time and 
 examine and measure the contents, and to go on property of any 
 oysterman on shore for the purpose of making proper investiga- 
 tion of the accuracy of the reports handed in. 
 
 It might be necessary to provide for other details, but in 
 the main it seems that this plan would be fair to all concerned, 
 in that it would do away with all questions as to valuation of 
 grounds. The real test as to such valuation is productivity. If 
 ground produces well, it ought to be made to pay accordingly to 
 the State. If it produces nothing, then it would have to pay 
 nothing except the fifteen mills on a valuation of $10 as specified, 
 and, of course, if the ground produced nothing, the owner might 
 release it to the State in accordance with the present law practice. 
 
 It may be said that very much of the ground now being held 
 is, and always has been, held in violation of the terms of the 
 original grants, because no use of it for purposes of oyster cul- 
 ture has ever been made by the owner. The ground has been 
 held, apparently, to enable the owner to make large claims as 
 to the amount of his acreage for purposes of advertising. It 
 may be said, however, that if ground is of any use whatever 
 for purposes of oyster culture it must be worth the $10 an acre 
 per year. This would require the owner to pay to the State only 
 fifteen cents each year per acre on ground so held. 
 
 The proposed law would be automatic in its operation. There 
 would be no assessor nor board of relief. The owner would 
 pay nothing (except the fifteen cents an acre), if the ground 
 produced nothing. If the ground produced little, he would 
 pay little. If it produced much, he would pay and would 
 doubtless be willing to pay in proportion. The claim is often 
 made before the board of relief that no set has been secured 
 for a certain number of years and that there has been nothing 
 taken from the ground except old oysters, and that the 
 value of the franchise, for that particular year has been cor- 
 respondingly low. These claims would adjust themselves under 
 the proposed law, and it is difficult to see how any injustice could 
 be done to anyone. Of course, it ought to be provided that the 
 
44 NATURAL OYSTER BEDS. 
 
 reports should not be made public as to detail and, so as to prevent 
 one dealer from prying into the affairs of another, they should 
 be kept from public scrutiny. 
 
 NATURAL OYSTER BEDS. 
 
 The statutes provide that certain so-called natural oyster 
 grounds shall be designated and reserved for the use and benefit 
 of all persons, residents of this State, who shall take out an 
 annual license in accordance with section 3234 of the General 
 Statutes. - 
 
 The payment required for such license shall be $2 for every 
 vessel or boat under five tons, and for a vessel or boat exceeding 
 five tons, fifty cents for each additional ton, subject to conditions 
 relative to size of boat, weight of dredge, power, etc., also 
 owner's length of residence in the State. 
 
 There are nine such natural beds designated in Section 3214 
 of the General Statutes as follows : 
 
 Cormell Reef Natural Bed, 15 acres; Portchester Bed, 218 
 acres; Great Captains Island Natural Bed, 152 acres; Field 
 Point Natural Bed, 84 acres; Greenwich Point Natural Bed, 
 403 acres; Fairfield Bar and Fairfield Natural Beds, 1,237 acres; 
 Bridgeport Natural Bed, 334 acres; Stratford Natural Bed, 
 3,055 acres; Roton Point and Fish Island Natural Beds, 307 
 acres. The total acreage being 5,805 acres. 
 
 Of the beds mentioned above only the last four are buoyed 
 by the State, and are, therefore, the only ones that are worked 
 to any considerable extent. Originally all these beds were very 
 productive, but the effect of continual use and their present con- 
 dition is well described by Mr. B. Frank Wood, late Superin- 
 tendent of the Bureau of Marine Fisheries of the State of New 
 York, who is entirely familiar with all the oyster grounds in 
 Long Island Sound. He says : 
 
 "It is no secret that the natural shell-fish lands under public 
 waters of the State have been scraped and raked into a condition 
 of almost entire depletion, until very few traces can be found of 
 beds which could under the statutory definition be said to be of 
 natural growth. This disappearance of natural growth shell- 
 fish is not strange or wonderful, for it must be remembered that 
 men, while giving nothing back and doing nothing to destroy the 
 enemies of the shell-fish, have raked entire bays and arms of the 
 sea bare of their product, thus destroying the balance of nature 
 by use of the most radical means for the annihilation of oysters 
 and clams. 
 
NATURAL OYSTER BEDS. 45 
 
 "Natural forces are no doubt sufficient to conserve and even 
 guarantee natural conditions, but when to the attacks of star- 
 fish, borer, periwinkle, and other enemies of the shell-fish are 
 added the sweeping raids of the all-consuming fisherman, there 
 is certainly little left for the mollusc but extinction. 
 
 ''It must be understood that as soon as oysters are found, 
 numbers of fishermen crowd to the locality, and the shell-fish, 
 before they are as large as a one-cent piece, are raked up and 
 sold as seed. A few weeks or even days may suffice to 
 deplete entirely the locality of oysters. That the shell-fish prod- 
 uct under such destructive manipulation was in imminent danger 
 of being practically wiped out, and that oysters might soon be 
 obtainable only as a luxury for the rich, was years ago appreciated 
 by those who have given the subject attention, and in consequence 
 the existing system of state control was inaugurated. Under the 
 new system of granting or leasing lands to individual planters, 
 lands under water are granted at a fixed price or rental. 
 
 "The planters are encouraged to make every effort and adopt 
 every improvement which may be expected to increase the quan- 
 tity and improve the quality of the product. Millions of dollars 
 ""are invested in the industry. The arch enemy of the oyster and 
 the bane of every planter, the star-fish, is successfully combated ; 
 other enemies are effectively dealt with, and numerous unfavor- 
 able conditions are met and overcome. Appliances have been 
 improved, and the types of vessels used in the business are 
 constantly bettered. 
 
 "Under the local natural bed system, efficient means of 
 destroying the enemies of the shell-fish, involving the use of 
 steamers, was out of the question. Under the present system 
 of state control, the planters may obtain sufficient lands, employ 
 capital to advantage, combat the natural enemies of the shell-fish, 
 and have the benefit of proper surveys and boundaries, the lines 
 being accurately fixed and easily relocated when necessary. 
 
 "There is, unfortunately, in some of the towns and villages 
 upon our coast an unprogressive element composed of those who 
 prefer to reap where they have not sown ; who rely upon what 
 they term their 'natural rights' to rake where they may choose in 
 the public waters. They deplete, but do not build up ! They 
 think because it may be possible to go out upon the waters for 
 a few hours in the twenty-four (when the tide serves) and dig 
 a half peck of shell-fish, that it is sufficient reason why such 
 lands should not be leased by the State to private planters. It 
 might as well be said that it is wrong for the Government to 
 grant homestead farms to settlers because a few blackberries 
 might be plucked upon the lands by any who cared to look 
 for them. 
 
 "Though there is an increasing demand for shell-fish, there 
 has been a tendency in many quarters to adopt measures for 
 limiting the supply. For instance, there has been legislation by 
 ( means of which close seasons have been established, or the size 
 of the shell-fish that may be taken limited, etc., the idea apparently 
 being to conserve the supply. But would it not be better to 
 increase the supply by encouraging the planters to cultivate the 
 many thousands of acres in the State available for this purpose? 
 The objection to granting leases in certain localities has been 
 made that at one time (however remote) natural beds of oysters 
 existed, and that perhaps, if the grounds were allowed to remain 
 idle they might be revivified and the natural growthers again 
 have an opportunity to gather the product. If this reasoning 
 
46 REPORTS OF NATURAL GROWTHERS. 
 
 were good, it is still true that the exhaustive methods of work- 
 ing which in time past denuded the lands would, if used again, 
 produce a similar result." 
 
 The actual condition, therefore, of the Connecticut natural 
 beds is that only four out of the nine are considered to be of 
 sufficient importance to buoy, and of these only a small part of 
 the acreage is now productive. The continuation of the present 
 method of use would soon result, undoubtedly, in complete 
 impoverishment of these beds. 
 
 On the other hand a change in the policy by the State towards 
 these beds and the adoption of the leasing system will give an 
 opportunity for the development of these natural oyster-produc- 
 ing areas, following the scientific method used by the private 
 owners, until they would become the largest producing and ny>st 
 valuable oyster grounds in Long Island Sound. 
 
 There is an oysterman's story to the effect that one man 
 offered $60,000 per year as an annual rental for one of the more 
 prolific of the natural beds for a term of five years. While this 
 may be an exaggeration, nevertheless it is an indication of the 
 appreciation of the possibilities of the development of such 
 ground by those sufficiently skillful and experienced to bring 
 it about. 
 
 INFORMATION FROM NATURAL GROWTHERS. 
 
 In order to secure some approximate information relative 
 to the business of the natural growthers, the following blank 
 was sent to all such persons in the State. 
 
 To be returned to the Tax Commissioner, Hartford, Conn., on 
 or before October 1, 1910. 
 
 STATE OF CONNECTICUT 
 
 Return to the State Board of Equalization. 
 
 NATURAL OYSTER GROWTHERS. 
 
 Return of 
 
 Request for this information authorized in 
 
 SPECIAL LAWS NO. 486, SESSION OF 1909. 
 
 Section 1. That the state board of equalization be and is 
 hereby appointed a commission to investigate the oyster properties 
 owned by the state, the production thereof, the revenue received 
 
REPORTS OF NATURAL GROWTHERS. 47 
 
 therefrom, trespasses committed thereon, the protection pro- 
 vided therefor, and all things pertaining to the general care and 
 management thereof, and the matter of the valuation and taxation 
 of such properties in this state owned by individuals, firms, and 
 corporations, which commission shall report its findings and 
 recommendations thereon to the next session of the general 
 assembly. 
 
 Sec. 2. Said commission is hereby authorized to compel, by 
 subpoena or capias issued by any member of said commission or 
 other proper authority, the attendance of any person before it as 
 a witness, and to administer oaths and to cause the production 
 of any papers, books, or maps necessary for the purposes herein 
 provided for, and to punish for contempt to the same extent as 
 justices of the peace may in criminal cases. * * * * 
 
 1. Number of years you have worked under license, 
 
 2. Your present age, 
 
 3. Other business, if any, 
 
 4. Names of beds worked each year, 
 
 5. Names and numbers of boats, 
 
 6. Do you own your boats ? 
 
 7. Average number of days you have worked on natural beds 
 
 each year, 
 
 8. Estimated total number of bushels you have taken off 
 
 during the last five years, 
 
 9. Average price received per bushel, 
 
 10. Portion of product sold to buyers who lived outside the 
 
 State, 
 
 Signed, 
 
 Address, 
 
 Date , 1910. 
 
 State of Connecticut 
 
 County of 
 
 ss. 
 
 Personally appeared the above-named and made oath to the 
 truth of the above statement by him subscribed and of the matters 
 therein contained according to the best of his knowledge, infor- 
 mation and belief. 
 
 Notary Public. 
 
 Explanations may be written on the back of this sheet ; also, 
 remarks relative to protection, trespass, contamination, and 
 changes in the laws relative to any phase of the oyster industry. 
 
 Answers were received from sixty-six natural growthers 
 and the totals, averages and deductions from the different 
 answers are as follows : 
 
 Average number of years in the business 9.13 
 
 Average age 45-3 
 
 Number admitting to have other business 17 
 
 Number claiming to have no other business 49 
 
 Number owning one boat 54 
 
48 REPORTS OF NATURAL GROWTHERS. 
 
 Number owning two boats 9 
 
 Number owning three boats 4 
 
 Number owning no boats 7 
 
 The number of days spent working on the ground ranged 
 from 15 to 250, with an average of 98 days. 
 
 The total number of bushels taken off in one year by any 
 one person ranged from 180 to 4,000, or a total of 51,888 bushels, 
 being an average of 1,058.9 bushels to each person. 
 
 The total number of bushels of oysters taken from the 
 ground in five years was given as 247,655, or an average of 
 4,953.1 bushels for each person, during five years. 
 
 The prices received per bushel for sale of the oysters ranged 
 from 25 cents to 75 cents, or an average of 53.2 cents per bushel. 
 
 The receipts per year, per person, were reported to be from 
 $32.50 to an alleged $2,550.00, a total of $26,557.05, or an 
 average of $603.56 to each person. 
 
 Of all the oysters taken from the natural beds those report- 
 ing showed an average of 51.8 per cent, of the total as being 
 sold to parties outside of the State. Ten of the natural growthers 
 claimed to plant the whole or part of the seed which they caught. 
 
 The reports summarized above represented only about a 
 quarter of all the natural growthers whose names are listed by the 
 Shell-Fish Commissioners. It is probable that these are the most 
 successful persons engaged in this industry, and that if the other 
 three-fourths could have reported they would have shown small 
 results in every way, and would have reduced the averages and 
 receipts, as given above, to a large extent. This is a definite 
 indication of the comparative small benefit of natural beds to 
 a large number of natural growthers. 
 
 The industry itself is certainly somewhat of a gamble and, 
 as such, lures many persons to take out a license, in the hope that 
 they will be lucky and draw a prize, but while a few are able 
 to make a good day's wages, a very large number, probably, 
 would be much better off to continue at some definite employment 
 which would bring them at least $2 per day. 
 
 The leasing of ground in small areas will give an opportunity 
 for those of the natural growthers who are really oystermen 
 to engage in the business for themselves ; cultivate the ground ; 
 produce a satisfactory product and derive a very much larger 
 financial benefit than under the present conditions. 
 
LEASING THE NATURAL BEDS. 49 
 
 PROPOSED LEASING SYSTEM OF THE 
 NATURAL BEDS. 
 
 This Board recommends, ' therefore, that the natural beds 
 within the territory described in section 3214 of the General 
 Statutes be abolished, and such territory be leased to citizens of 
 the State under the following- conditions: 
 
 Term of lease should not exceed ten years, with the privilege 
 of renewal for another period of ten years. No lease should be 
 made to any one person, individually, or any one person con- 
 nected with or in the employment of any firm or corporation, 
 for more than twenty-five acres. Preference should be given 
 in granting leases to those persons who for the past five years, 
 consecutively, have held their licenses to work on the natural beds 
 and who live in the locality bordering on such beds. It should 
 be provided that no lease should be transferred or assigned, and 
 in the event of death or termination the lease should be sur- 
 rendered. It would seem that an annual rental of $i per acre 
 in addition to a productivity tax of at least two cents per bushel 
 would be an entirely reasonable and fair return. 
 
 There is no question that if such a method were adopted it 
 would raise to a productive state a large amount of ground for 
 oyster culture. It would give an opportunity for increased profits 
 to a large number of persons, with a corresponding increase in 
 revenue to the State for the charges received from such natural 
 beds. 
 
 The yearly revenue derived from licenses to work the natural 
 beds and the expense for buoying and inspecting the same since 
 1895 are given as follows in the Shell-Fish Commissioners' 
 reports : 
 
 
 Receipts 
 
 Expenses 
 
 IS95 
 
 $695.50 
 
 $ 490.85 
 
 1896 
 
 860.50 
 
 970.83 
 
 1897 
 
 12.00 
 
 1,261.24 
 
 1898 
 
 860.00 
 
 1,103.34 
 
 1899 
 
 702.00 
 
 2,276.42 
 
 1900 
 
 934.00 
 
 1,534-85 
 
 1 901 
 
 547.00 
 
 1,945-99 
 
 1902 
 
 255-50 
 
 1,357-86 
 
 1903 
 
 83.50 
 
 1,033-40 
 
 1904 
 
 676.00 
 
 1,096.20 
 
 1905 
 
 778.00 
 
 1,401.24 
 
50 LEASING THE NATURAL BEDS. 
 
 
 Receipts 
 
 Expenses 
 
 1906 
 
 $ 551-50 
 
 $1,345-05 
 
 1907 
 
 1,265.00 
 
 i,532.5o 
 
 1908 
 
 1,306.50 
 
 1,70445 
 
 1909 
 
 1,002.00 
 
 1,716.70 
 
 1910 
 
 650.OO 
 
 1,837-30 
 
 Totals, $11,179.00 $22,608.22 
 
 This shows an average yearly income of $698.68; an aver- 
 age yearly expense of $1,413.01 ; a total net loss for sixteen (16) 
 years of $11,429.22, and an average yearly loss of $713.89. 
 
 The leasing of such ground at $1 per acre would theoretically 
 yield $5,000, annually, and a productivity tax of two cents per 
 bushel on an annual catch of only 200,000 bushels would increase 
 this revenue from a net yearly loss of $713.89 to a yearly gain 
 of $9,000. In a comparatively short time this income would be 
 materially changed by the very much larger production which 
 the natural beds would yield under private cultivation. 
 
 FEDERAL BUREAU OF CHEMISTRY. 
 
 The first public attention throughout the country was drawn 
 to the polluted conditions of many oysters which were being sold 
 in interstate commerce, by the publication in October, 1909, of 
 the now renowned Food Inspection Decision No. no, by the 
 Bureau of Chemistry, under the direction of Dr. Harvey W. 
 Wiley. 
 
 There is given herewith a statement by Dr. George W. Stiles 
 of the Bureau of Chemistry, which is a part of a paper which 
 he has prepared relative to the investigation of oysters shipped 
 from various states together with his recommendations for over- 
 coming the evils connected therewith. Dr. Stiles has personally 
 visited many of the oyster-opening houses in Connecticut. He is 
 known to a large number of our oyster growers. His statement 
 of the case has a special bearing on the oyster industry in 
 Connecticut. 
 
 THE BACTERIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION OF SHUCKED AND 
 SHELL OYSTERS. 
 
 By George W. Stiles, M.D., Ph.D. 
 
 Bacteriological Chemist Bureau of Chemistry. 
 
 U. S. Department of Agriculture. 
 
 During the last quarter of a century rapid developments have 
 taken place along all lines of sanitary science, and nowhere is 
 
FEDERAL BUREAU OF CHEMISTRY. 5 1 
 
 this progress more noticeable and striking than in the realm of 
 food bacteriology. 
 
 Since the passage of the Pure Food and Drugs Acts in 1905, 
 the need of bacteriology as applied to sanitation has been amply 
 demonstrated. This is particularly true in connection with the 
 production, care, and handling of all kinds of food material, 
 both in their raw and finished state. 
 
 The subject of the possibility of oysters and other shell-fish 
 becoming contaminated with sewage-polluted water was one of 
 the first problems to receive consideration after the passage of 
 the Food Law. At the solicitation of a committee representing 
 the North American Oyster Growers and Dealers Association, 
 Dr. H. W. Wiley, Chief of the Bureau of Chemistry, arranged to 
 have the necessary investigation made to study the whole oyster 
 situation. Various phases of the industry were taken up and 
 systematically considered in detail. The writer was instructed 
 to take up the industry from the standpoint of the bacteriologist. 
 
 The difficulty causing the greatest annoyance to the Oyster 
 Growers and Dealers Association in the beginning was the moot 
 question as to the best manner of shipping oysters. After the 
 completion of exhaustive experiments, carried on under different 
 commercial conditions, and representing various sections of the 
 oyster-producing territory, the conclusions and results of these 
 investigations, together with public hearings with practical oyster- 
 men, were condensed and issued October 15, 1909, in the form 
 of F. I. D. No. no. 
 
 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 Office of the Secretary. 
 
 Board of Food and Drug Inspection 
 
 FOOD INSPECTION DECISION 1 10. 
 
 SHELL-FISH. 
 
 The Department has investigated the preparation and ship- 
 ment of oysters, clams, and other shell-fish. A public hearing on 
 this subject was held by the Board of Food and Drug Inspection 
 on May 20, 1909. At this hearing, growers, packers, dealers, and 
 the public were afforded an opportunity to be heard. 
 
 It is unlawful to ship or to sell in interstate commerce oysters 
 or other shell-fish taken from insanitary or polluted beds. Tbe 
 pollution of oysters with sewage can readily be detected by bac- 
 teriological examination, and such polluted oysters or other shell- 
 fish are adulterated under section 7 of the Food and Drugs Act of 
 June 30, 1906, in that they contain an added "poisonous or other 
 added deleterious ingredient which may render such article 
 injurious to health." 
 
 Such articles are likewise adulterated under section 7, in the 
 case of foods, because they consist "in whole or in part of a filthy, 
 decomposed, or putrid animal or vegetable substance." 
 
 It is unlawful to ship or sell in interstate commerce oysters 
 or other shell-fish which have become polluted because of packing 
 
52 FEDERAL BUREAU OF CHEMISTRY. 
 
 under insanitary conditions or being placed in unclean receptacles. 
 In order to prevent pollution during the packing or shipment of 
 oysters, it is necessary to give proper attention to the sanitary 
 condition of the establishment in which they are packed and to 
 use only receptacles which have been thoroughly cleansed as soon 
 as emptied. In order to prevent the possibility of contamination, 
 it is desirable that such containers be sterilized before using. 
 
 It is unlawful to ship or sell in interstate commerce oysters 
 or other shell-fish which have been subjected to "floating" or 
 "drinking" in brackish water, or water containing less salt than 
 that in which they are grown. Such food is adulterated under 
 section 7 of the law because a substance "has been mixed and 
 packed with it so as to reduce or lower or injuriously affect its 
 quality or strength." There can be no objection to "drinking" 
 shell-fish in unpolluted water of the same salt content as that 
 from which they have been removed. Attention is called, how- 
 ever, to the dangers resulting from "drinking" shell-fish near 
 polluted fresh water streams and near other sources of pollution. 
 
 It is unlawful to ship or sell in interstate commerce shucked 
 oysters to which water has been added, either directly or in the 
 form of melted ice. Such food is adulterated under section 7 
 of the act because a "substance has been mixed and packed with 
 it so as to reduce or lower or injuriously affect its quality or 
 strength," and also because a "substance has been substituted 
 wholly or in part for the article." 
 
 The packing of shell-fish with ice in contact may lead to the 
 absorption by the oyster of a portion of the water formed by the 
 melting ice, thus leading to the adulteration of the oysters with 
 water. 
 
 Only unpolluted cold or iced water should be employed in 
 washing shucked shell-fish, and the washing, including chilling, 
 should not continue longer than the minimum time necessary 
 for cleaning and chilling. 
 
 In view of the fact that the shipping season has begun and 
 shippers will require several months to provide themselves with 
 suitable containers for the shipment of shell-fish out of contact 
 with ice, no prosecutions will be recommended prior to May 1, 
 1910, for the shipment or sale in interstate commerce of oysters 
 or other shell-fish because of the addition of water caused solely 
 by shipment in contact with ice. 
 
 H. W. WILEY, 
 F. L. DUNLAP, 
 GEO. P. McCABE, 
 
 Board of Food and Drug Inspection. 
 Approved : 
 
 W. M. HAYS, Acting Secretary of Agriculture. 
 Washington, D. C, October 14, 1909. 
 
 From the sanitary point of view the ruling of the Food and 
 Drug Inspection Board makes it unlawful to ship or sell in inter- 
 state commerce oysters or other shell-fish taken from polluted 
 beds. This order also made it unlawful to sell or ship in inter- 
 state commerce oysters or other shell-fish which have become 
 polluted because of packing under insanitary conditions or being 
 placed in unclean receptacles.. It was further considered unlawful 
 to ship or sell in interstate commerce shucked oysters to which 
 
STATEMENT OF DR. GEORGE W. STILES. 53 
 
 water has been added, either directly or in the form of melted 
 ice. Food Inspection Decision No. 121, an amendment to F. I. D. 
 no, was issued June 4, 1910, as follows: 
 
 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 
 Office of the Secretary 
 
 FOOD INSPECTION DECISION 121. 
 
 THE FLOATING OF SHELL-FISH. 
 
 (Amendment to F. I. D. no.) 
 
 Considerable evidence has been submitted to the Department 
 since the issuance of Food Inspection Decision no on the prac- 
 tice of floating or drinking oysters in water of less saline con- 
 tent than that in which they were grown to maturity. 
 
 Full consideration has been given to all the hearings and to 
 the briefs, and other information submitted subsequent to the 
 hearings, and the Board is of the opinion that it is not improper 
 to drink oysters in water of a saline content equal to that in 
 which oysters will grow to maturity. If, however, oysters are 
 floated in water of a less saline content than that in which oysters 
 will properly mature, the packages containing such oysters must, 
 be very clearly and legibly labeled "Floated Oysters," otherwise 
 they will be considered adulterated under section 7 of the law. 
 
 Particular attention should be paid by the growers and 
 handlers of oysters to the character of the water in which the 
 oysters are brought to maturity or floated. Where such waters 
 are polluted it will invariably follow that the oysters will also 
 partake of this pollution and subsequent washing of the oysters, 
 or even floating in water which is not polluted is likely not to 
 cleanse them of this pollution. 
 
 Oysters found in interstate commerce in a polluted condition 
 because of the character of the water in which they are grown 
 or floated are adulterated under the Food and Drugs Act. 
 F. L. DUNLAP, 
 GEO. P. McCABE, 
 
 Board of Food and Drug Inspection. 
 Approved : 
 
 JAMES WILSON, Secretary of Agriculture. 
 Washington, D. C, May 14, 1910. 
 
 Having finished our shipping experiments, and concluding 
 that shucked oysters should be no longer shipped or sold with ice 
 in contact, our attention was directed to the more serious aspect, 
 viz : the possibilities of shell-fish pollution from sewage polluted 
 water. 
 
 The combined oyster investigations have covered the oyster 
 seasons of 1908, 1909, and 1910, and the writer has personally 
 gone out over the oyster layings, collected samples of water and 
 shell-fish for examination, and at the same time made a careful 
 sanitary inspection of each locality visited. Our investigations 
 have extended from Maine along the Atlantic Coast to the gulf 
 of Mexico. Approximately one thousand samples of oysters, 
 quahaugs, soft clams, and sea water have been collected and 
 
54 STATEMENT OF DR. GEORGE W. STILES. 
 
 examined bacteriologically during these three years of investi- 
 gations. These samples represent the product during every step 
 from source of production to consumer. 
 
 The contamination of oysters may be explained from any 
 one or more of the following sources : 
 
 (a) Contaminated grounds. 
 
 (b) Polluted water in which they are floated. 
 
 (c) Insanitary shucking houses. 
 
 (d) Washing with impure water and contaminated ice. 
 
 (e) Unclean methods of handling, packing, and shipping. 
 
 (a) Vast areas of valuable oyster grounds are admirably 
 located for oyster culture all along the Atlantic Coast. Years ago 
 no difficulty was experienced from pollution by sewage, however 
 the conditions have now changed. Many localities where oysters 
 grow are dangerously polluted, and the extent and seriousness of 
 this pollution will continue to increase as long as man is content 
 to discharge his waste promiscuously into our natural bodies of 
 water. Sewage is the greatest enemy to the progress of the 
 oyster industry. The practical solution of this problem resolves 
 itself into one of two things, either the shell-fish must be removed 
 from the polluted water, or else the untreated sewage must not 
 be allowed to flow into the water over shell-fish layings. 
 
 (b) Oysters grown on grounds free from contamination will 
 become infected if floated in sewage polluted water. Many of 
 the recorded epidemics of disease resulting from eating con- 
 taminated oysters were caused by oysters which had been pre- 
 viously floated in sewage-polluted water. As ordinarily practiced, 
 the process of floating in water of a questionable purity should 
 be prohibited. 
 
 (c) The ordinary oyster shucking establishment is an 
 extremely insanitary place. There are a few modernly con- 
 structed buildings, however, fully equipped with sterilizing facil- 
 ities and proper methods of carrying on such a business where 
 sanitary measures are enforced. Oyster houses should be built 
 and so arranged as to be kept free from cobwebs, dust, filth, etc. 
 
 (d) Shucked oysters should be washed with pure water 
 and ice. Contamination may result from this source alone. 
 Natural ice frozen from polluted water will contaminate oysters 
 if placed in the water for washing purposes. 
 
 (e) Unclean methods of handling, packing and shipping 
 oysters may result in contamination of the product, even though 
 free from pollution at the beds. All utensils, tubs and other con- 
 tainers used by oystermen should be efficiently cleansed and 
 sterilized by the use of live steam or boiling water. Oysters pro- 
 duced and handled under clean conditions, and properly refrig- 
 erated, will remain in good condition for several days. 
 
STATEMENT OF DR. GEORGE W. STILES. 55 
 
 CONCLUSIONS. 
 
 (i) Shucked oysters, as ordinarily found on the market, 
 contain more bacteria per given volume of liquor than oysters 
 opened directly from the shell under clean conditions. 
 
 (2) The bacterial content of opened market oysters may 
 include numerous B. coli and streptococci. Each of these organ- 
 isms is not only evidence of fecal contamination, but to my mind 
 when present in such large numbers as indicated in table No. 3, 
 their toxines may cause gastro-intestinal derangement of a serious 
 nature if consumed raw by susceptible individuals. 
 
 (3) Oysters may be grown on pure grounds and remain in 
 good condition while in the shell, but, because of unclean methods 
 of shucking and handling they may be subsequently contaminated 
 and rendered unfit for food. 
 
 (4) There is no assurance that shucked market oysters are 
 always cooked before consumption. They may be served raw on 
 an old shell, in the form of cocktails, on plates, or otherwise. 
 
 (5) Oysters intended for human consumption should be 
 grown in water free from pollution, and the greatest care should 
 be exercised to keep such a product in a clean and wholesome 
 condition until consumed. 
 
 STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. 
 
 The strict requirements of the Department of Agriculture 
 as defined in Food Inspection Decision No. no, relative to the 
 floating or drinking of oysters to be sold in interstate commerce, 
 or the maturing of the same in polluted waters, in the opinion 
 of the Board required special consideration in its connection with 
 the Connecticut oyster industry. 
 
 A large number of the oyster growers had expressed them- 
 selves as being very desirous of conforming strictly to the 
 federal regulations. While it is apparent that certain of the 
 river and harbor waters are largely polluted by sewage, it is a 
 well-known fact that a large area of the Connecticut oyster 
 ground is absolutely free from any contamination, and perfectly 
 proper to be used in the oyster industry. It is not fair to the 
 reputable oyster growers to assume that all the waters covering 
 oyster lands in Connecticut are polluted, neither is it fair to the 
 public to assume that all oysters grown or taken from Connecticut 
 waters are absolutely free from contamination. It seemed to 
 the Board very necessary, therefore, both in the interest of the 
 honest oyster growers, as well as to the public, to have official 
 
56 STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. 
 
 4 
 
 determination by proper and competent authority of the condi- 
 tion of the various harbor and coastal waters in proximity to 
 the oyster grounds. 
 
 The proper body to make such investigations, which would be 
 received with confidence by all concerned, is the State Board of 
 Health. The Board decided to request it to make such an investi- 
 gation and to that end addressed to it the following letter in 
 April, 1910: 
 
 April 13, 1910. 
 The Honorable State Board of Health, 
 
 Capitol, 
 
 Hartford, Conn. 
 Gentlemen: 
 
 The pure food and drug committee of the Department of 
 Agriculture at Washington have made certain rulings relative 
 to oysters shipped in interstate trade, which seriously affect the 
 oyster industry in this State. 
 
 These rulings prohibit the shipment of oysters that are 
 gathered from waters that are polluted by sewage contamination. 
 They also prohibit the drinking of oysters in such waters, and 
 prescribe that if floated, it shall be done in water of the same 
 salt content in which they are grown. 
 
 While this committee is explicit in their prohibitions, they 
 are not at all definite in their suggestions as to how these alleged 
 dangers may be overcome ; nor do they give any definite standard 
 of purity which the water must be in order to be used for the 
 growing of oysters. Neither do they state definitely the stand- 
 ard of salt content which is acceptable. 
 
 The Board of Equalization, acting as a special commission 
 for the investigation of oyster properties of this State, under 
 Chapter 486 of the Special Acts of 1909, has held public hearings 
 in Bridgeport, South Norwalk and New Haven, and has dis- 
 cussed freely with the oyster planters the rulings of this com- 
 mittee, together with the serious difficulties which almost menace 
 their industry on account of the contamination of the rivers and 
 harbors by sewage, and the waste products of manufactories. 
 
 At a meeting of the Board of Equalization, held yesterday, 
 I was instructed to request your honorable body to make analyses, 
 as soon as possible, of samples of streams, and harbor waters 
 near New Haven, Bridgeport, Norwalk, and possibly other points 
 along the coast, also analyses of oysters floated in those waters, 
 and, in addition, to secure similar data relative to waters and 
 oysters in other sections of the so-called oyster grounds, so that 
 there may be an official statement as to what waters are satis- 
 factory for the growth and floating of oysters in this State. 
 
 The oyster planters have assured this Commission that if such 
 official information can be secured, they will use their endeavors 
 
STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. 57 
 
 to adapt themselves to present conditions until further relief can 
 be secured. 
 
 The Board also requests that you suggest, at your conveni- 
 ence, legislation which would be sufficiently practical, so that it 
 could be enforced, to remove as much as possible the sewage 
 contamination which exists at present, and to prevent further con- 
 tamination in the future. 
 
 The Board asks that action be taken at your next meeting on 
 our request for the official analyses of the waters, for it is very 
 desirable that definite information relative to this matter be 
 secured as soon as possible. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 WM. H. CORBIN, Tax Commissioner. 
 
 Early in December the following - letter was received giving 
 action of the Board and the results of the investigations which 
 were made in New Haven Harbor: 
 
 CONNECTICUT STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. 
 
 December 10, 1910. 
 Board of Equalization and Oyster Investigation Commission, 
 
 Hartford, Conn. 
 Gentlemen: 
 
 In response to your request contained in letter of April 13, 
 from Mr. Wm. H. Corbin, Tax Commissioner, that the State 
 Board of Health would make analyses of the harbor waters and 
 streams near New Haven, Bridgeport, Norwalk and other points 
 along the coast, also analyses of oysters floated in those waters, 
 the board at its quarterly meeting in April appointed a committee 
 consisting of Dr. A. J. Wolff, Mr. T. H. McKenzie, Professor 
 H. W. Conn, Bacteriologist, and the Secretary to consider the 
 matter and report to the Board at a special meeting to be held as 
 soon as the Committee was ready to report. 
 
 This committee held several sessions and at a special meeting 
 of the Board held in June reported that this investigation was one 
 that ought to be taken up by the State Board of Health, and 
 recommended that it be done. 
 
 The Board accepted the report and recommendation of the 
 committee and authorized our chemist, Mr. James A. Newlands, 
 and Mr. George C. Ham, Civil Engineer, to undertake the work 
 of investigation. It was decided, owing to the magnitude of the 
 work and the limited resources at our disposal, that the work, 
 for the present summer be confined to New Haven Harbor. 
 
 The work as authorized was carried on from June until 
 October and at a special meeting held December 8, Mr. Newlands 
 and Mr. Ham made a report to the Board of their summer's work. 
 
58 SANITARY INVESTIGATION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR. 
 
 This report, while not regarded as complete, was accepted as a 
 report of progress, and in accordance with a vote passed at this 
 meeting, I herewith transmit to you a copy of said report. 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 JOSEPH H. TOWNSEND, Secretary. 
 
 The report in full is given on page 109. The work of investi- 
 gation in New Haven Harbor occupied the time of Mr. Newlands 
 and Mr. Ham nearly all summer. 
 
 Observations and experiments were made at various stages 
 of high and low water with different air currents. The per- 
 centage of land water to sea water was also determined. The 
 direction of the flow of each one of the main sewers was deter- 
 mined. Analyses were made of the waters of the harbors and 
 rivers, at various depths, and also of the oyster liquor. Out of 
 the total area of over 2,000 acres of private oyster grounds in 
 New Haven Harbor 1506 acres showed definite evidences of the 
 presence of sewage pollution which should not be used for grow- 
 ing market oysters and 579 acres in addition would require 
 further investigation before any definite statement can be made. 
 Probably the contiguous natural beds are as much contaminated. 
 
 POLLUTED GROUNDS. 
 
 Oyster culture is carried on in Connecticut on a large scale 
 and with an intelligence and enterprise not exceeded by that 
 shown in any other state. It has become such a great and impor- 
 tant industry that it should be wisely fostered by the State. It 
 uses so much capital, it employs so many persons, it produces 
 such large quantities of a food product which is so much sought 
 for and widely consumed, that the promotion and protection of 
 the industry should be encouraged and aided. The State should 
 free it from any unjust suspicion and safeguard it from being 
 a public danger by adopting measures for protecting the oyster 
 grounds from sewage contamination. That the harbors along the 
 coast, where oysters are grown, are seriously polluted by sewers 
 discharging at points which have been taken because most con- 
 venient without any regard to the development of local nuisances, 
 or the dangers to persons eating oysters from such grounds, is 
 shown b}' the recent investigation in New Haven Harbor made 
 by the State Board of Health. During the examination of oyster 
 
POLLUTED GROUNDS. 59 
 
 beds in all localities where the beds were infected it was found 
 that the infection was due to sewage, and there are many other 
 oyster beds in this State so located that with the growth of the 
 adjacent towns the sewage, unless proper precautions are taken, 
 will destroy the commercial value of such beds. Aside from the 
 pollution of our oyster beds the indiscriminate discharge of crude 
 sewage into our streams and harbors is no doubt a potent factor 
 in the spread of communicable diseases and is a source of com- 
 plaint from the owners of shore property. 
 
 The problems connected with sewage disposal are very com- 
 plex and vary with the conditions of the case under considera- 
 tion, as a method which may be applicable at one point will be 
 totally unfit for another. Many of the sewerage systems of the 
 State have been built without any adequate conception of what 
 the plant was expected to do, or what should be done, and are, 
 therefore, inefficient. 
 
 Another problem relating to public water supplies is always 
 apparent, whether it is more economical to thoroughly purify 
 sewage, or more economical to purify the water which may be 
 polluted by such sewage. These are problems which cannot be 
 determined, ordinarily, by the city or town involved and it seems 
 too often to be the attitude of cities to think, if they can get their 
 sewage from their city, that it is immaterial what happens to 
 some other town. 
 
 All these considerations make it apparent that the matter 
 of sewage disposal should be placed in the hands of some cen- 
 tral body properly equipped with the necessary machinery 
 for dealing with the subject, efficiently, fairly and economically, 
 and the Board believes, as this is preeminently a question of 
 public healtb, this control should be placed with the State Board 
 of Health. 
 
 Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Kansas, Pennsyl- 
 vania, Ohio, Indiana and Vermont have given their state boards 
 of health quite definite powers in the regulation of sewage dis- 
 posal and the protection of water supplies, and their example 
 might well be followed. 
 
 The examination of the water outside of New Haven Harbor 
 to the south of the Breakwater showed the same to be sufficiently 
 free from colon bacilli to be entirely satisfactory for both grow- 
 ing and maturing oysters for interstate trade. It is not fair to 
 
60 POLLUTED GROUNDS. 
 
 the owners of this ground to include the sweeping assertion that 
 their ground is unfit for oyster cultivation as being near New 
 Haven. 
 
 There should be some state authority, preferably the State 
 Board of Health, to certify to the condition of all oyster grounds 
 that are above reproach, and also to prevent the sale, in the vari- 
 ous towns of the State, of oysters taken from polluted waters. 
 The Board of Health of New Haven has such a regulation, but 
 there is no prohibition against shipping such oysters which are shut 
 out of New Haven to any other town in the State. (Page 99.) 
 
 The Board definitely recommends that the State Board of 
 Health be specifically empowered to continue the investigation 
 of the condition of the harbors and coastal waters of this State, 
 which are in proximity to oyster-producing grounds, including 
 the natural oyster beds. 
 
 It is recommended further that the Board be authorized to 
 give certificates attesting to the purity of whatever grounds 
 are satisfactory for the maturing of oysters for the market. 
 Certificates should be withheld from all other oyster grounds, 
 in fact the State Board of Health should forbid taking oysters 
 from polluted beds for the market, as is prohibited in Rhode 
 Island and other states. 
 
 OPENING HOUSES. 
 
 The Board inspected a number of the buildings in different 
 localities in the State where oysters were opened. This visit 
 was made during Thanksgiving week of this year, at the time 
 when there is the largest demand for oysters. An opportunity 
 was thus given to inspect the method of operation, and the con- 
 ditions of the work rooms at the time of their greatest use. In 
 some of the houses men and women are employed, and in others 
 colored men, most of whom have worked as "shuckers" in Mary- 
 land and Virginia. 
 
 The following description has been given of this work: 
 "The method used in opening the shell is known as 'breaking' 
 or 'cracking.' The shucker stands or sits before a stout bench, 
 which may be a long table partitioned off into working spaces 
 for each one, and before whom the oysters are piled. Imme- 
 diately under his hand is a block of wood into which is inserted 
 
OPENING HOUSES. 6 I 
 
 an upright piece of iron called the 'cracking iron.' The shucker 
 is also provided with a double-headed hammer and a stiff, sharp 
 knife on a round wooden handle. On the left hand is worn a 
 rough woolen, rubber, or leathern half-mitten known as a 'cot' 
 to protect the skin. He seizes an oyster with the left hand with 
 the hinge in the palm, it is placed upon the cracking iron and 
 with one blow of the hammer the 'bill' or growing edge of the 
 shell is broken off. In the fracture thus made the strong knife 
 is pushed back until it cuts off the muscle attachment. The meat 
 is then tossed into the receptable which stands ready, and the 
 shells are dropped through a hole in the bench to a barrel or 
 tub placed underneath. The oysters as fast as opened are flung 
 into a tin receptable called the 'measure' holding a gallon or 
 more. Much of the oyster liquor also goes in with the meat and 
 when the measure is filled it is taken to the foreman and poured 
 into the 'skimmer,' the shucker receiving in exchange a brass 
 check entitling him to a definite payment for each quart. In some 
 cases the liquor is strained. If the liquor is strained out, only 
 about two-thirds of the measure would be filled. As soon as the 
 oysters are opened they are placed in the flat pan called the 
 'skimmer' while they are drained from their accompanying 
 liquor. They are then put into a large colander with perforated 
 sides, where a stream of water is turned upon them and they 
 are stirred about until washed clean. They are then put into 
 a tin receptacle for shipment." 
 
 During all this process the meats of the oysters are liable 
 to be contaminated or polluted by contact with dirty hands, foul 
 receptacles, and impure water. In view of the fact that these 
 oyster meats are often eaten raw, just as received from the dealer, 
 all of the above is a very serious matter. Since the advent of 
 the disclosures made by Dr. Harvey W. Wiley, chief of the 
 Bureau of Chemistry, as the result of inspection of oysters 
 shipped in interstate trade, attention has been called to the cause 
 of contamination and very great improvement has been made in 
 handling the product before shipment. Dr. Wiley's jurisdiction, 
 however, applies only to interstate commerce and there is no 
 ban whatever on intertown shipment within the State. 
 
 The visit of the Board to the oyster opening houses showed 
 quite a large diversity in the methods and care of handling the 
 oyster meats. In some houses the opening took place in old 
 
62 OPENING HOUSES. 
 
 wooden buildings with dusty rafters, wooden floors and benches, 
 many of them in a dirty condition with the wood saturated with 
 the oyster liquor. In these houses there was no uniformity in 
 the use of proper aprons and hand coverings to prevent contact 
 with soiled clothes and hands. Hot water and steam for cleans- 
 ing and sterilizing were not in evidence. The general lack of 
 cleanliness which was quite apparent gave the impression that 
 there should be some form of inspection which would require 
 more cleanly conditions in handling this food product, which may 
 be eaten without sufficient cooking, to destroy any harmful germs. 
 
 On the other hand, oyster opening houses situated elsewhere 
 in the State seemed to be entirely satisfactory in their appearance, 
 in the remarkable cleanliness and in the evident care in handling 
 the product. The construction of the buildings and the renewed 
 white paint made it impossible for a large amount of dirt to be 
 in evidence. The floors were of cement and were frequently 
 washed. The shell oysters were conveyed to the shuckers by the 
 gravity system, coming from large overhead storage bins. After 
 shucking, the shells were dropped through a hole in the bench 
 and in some cases were removed by an endless belt which 
 obviated the possibility of dust and dirt from the handling of 
 baskets. A large amount of pure water was in evidence in its 
 use for cleaning the meats and sorting them into the various 
 commercial sizes. 
 
 In these houses the shuckers were uniformly dressed in long 
 white aprons and the hands were well covered. Strainers were 
 used as receptacles and the shuckers were paid by solid measure. 
 The general impression from inspecting such an opening house 
 was one which inspired confidence in the use of oysters as a food 
 product and if known by users would certainly increase the 
 demand for and sale of such oysters. If certain oyster-growing 
 firms consider it advisable and even necessary to conduct their 
 business along such lines of cleanliness and sanitation, it is clearly 
 evident that such precautions are desirable, both from the stand- 
 point of the producer and the consumer. 
 
 In the opinion of the Board there should be a state law which 
 requires the State Board of Health or its agents to inspect, as 
 frequently as it may determine, all the opening houses in the 
 State, and secure a proper and uniform method of opening, 
 handling, and cleaning oysters that are sold for trade, either 
 
OPENING HOUSES. 63 
 
 within or without the State of Connecticut. Such a require- 
 ment would be of great benefit by creating an increased confi- 
 dence in the oyster as a food product and would make it known 
 throughout the country that all oysters opened in Connecticut 
 were uncontaminated by deleterious substances, and could be 
 used very freely by all consumers. All reasonable oyster growers 
 would welcome such inspection and the others should be made 
 to conform. The increased business which would result would 
 more than cover any additional expense which would be required 
 to maintain the standard which would be imposed by the Board of 
 Health. 
 
 In such inspection it is recommended that the "score card 
 system" be used similar to that employed by the Government 
 in the inspection' of dairies by the Agricultural Department as 
 shown on page 92 and that the definite method to follow closely 
 be that of Rhode Island's, see page 94. 
 
 The requirements for cleanliness should be something like 
 those required in Rhode Island or Virginia, given on pages 95 
 and 100. 
 
 CONFERENCES. 
 National Association of Shell-Fish Commissioners. 
 By appointment of Governor Weeks, the Tax Commissioner, 
 as the special representative of Connecticut, attended the second 
 annual convention of the National Association of Shell-Fish Com- 
 missioners, at Mobile, Ala., on April 19, 20, and 21, 1910. Mem- 
 bers of the Shell-Fish Commissions and other delegates from all 
 the oyster-growing states were present. 
 
 Very instructive papers were read, as follows : 
 "Oyster and Clam Culture in the North American States," 
 by Mr. B. Frank Wood, Supt., Bureau of Marine Fisheries, 
 New York. 
 
 "Oyster Culture in the Gulf States," by Mr. J. A. Joullian, 
 Secretary Oyster Commission of Alabama. 
 
 "Some Sanitary Considerations in Connection with the Treat- 
 ment of Oysters," by Dr. W. D. Bigelow, Bureau of Chemistry, 
 Washington, D. C. 
 
 "The Cultivation of the Oyster in "North Carolina," by Dr. 
 J. H. Pratt, State Geologist of North Carolina. 
 
 "Scientific Experiments in Oyster Culture," by Dr. Julius 
 Nelson, Biologist of the New Jersey Bureau of Shell-Fisheries. 
 
64 CONFERENCES. 
 
 An illustrated lecture on "The Oyster," by Mr. Swepson 
 Earle, Hydrographic Engineer for Maryland Shell-Fish Com- 
 mission. 
 
 A Symposium — topic, "How may the Public Oyster Lands 
 of a State be Best Administered for the Greatest Good of the 
 Whole State?" by Samuel F. Bowden, Shell-Fisheries Commis- 
 sioner of Rhode Island; Charles Wythe, Hydrographic Engi- 
 neer, Forest, Fish and Game Commission, New York; and Wil- 
 liam H. Corbin, Tax Commissioner of Connecticut. 
 
 Many practical suggestions were received from the papers 
 and discussions of the subjects, which have been of great help 
 to the Board in formulating its conclusions, which are presented 
 in this report. 
 
 The following resolutions were unanimously adopted: 
 
 Whereas, The Shell-Fish Industry of the United States 
 has the possibility of being one of the most important in the 
 country both commercially and as a food-producing agent; and 
 
 Whereas, The National Association of Shell-Fish Com- 
 missioners recognizes the paramount importance of insuring 
 public confidence in the purity and healthfulness of the shell- 
 fish supply; and 
 
 Whereas, There has developed in the United States during 
 recent years a marked tendency to improve the sanitary con- 
 ditions attending the cultivation, handling, shipment and sale of 
 oysters and other shell-fish; 
 
 Be it Resolved, that the Association expresses its grati- 
 fication at the steps that have been taken to this end by federal 
 and state authorities and by many firms and individuals interested 
 in the Shell-Fish business, and 
 
 Be it Resolved, that the Association, hereby goes on 
 record as being in hearty accord with the efforts of the Federal 
 Department of Agriculture to insure to the general public an 
 absolute standard of purity in all oysters and other Shell-Fish 
 used in interstate trade and in the steps taken by that Depart- 
 ment in the enforcement of the Food and Drugs Act ; and 
 
 Be it Resolved Further, that this Association, through 
 the delegates representing the Shell-Fish Authorities of 
 the different states, use its influence for the removal from all 
 streams and coastal waters of sources of pollution which may be 
 prejudicial to human health or to the development of shell- fish. 
 
 By unanimous rising vote, Dr. Harvey W. Wiley, Chief of 
 the United States Bureau of Chemistry, was elected an honorary 
 member of the Association. 
 
CONFERENCES. 65 
 
 ANNUAL MEETING OF THE OYSTER GROWERS AND 
 DEALERS ASSOCIATION OF NORTH AMERICA. 
 
 By vote of the Board of Equalization, the Tax Commissioner 
 attended the second annual meeting of the Oyster Growers and 
 Dealers' Association of North America, at Norfolk, Va., May 
 17 and 18, i9i'o. 
 
 There was a large attendance, probably over three hundred, 
 from all the oyster-producing states in the country, also many 
 jobbers and dealers from the interior states. 
 
 The following papers were read : 
 
 Address — "The National Pure Food Law as Applied to 
 Oysters," by Dr. G. W. Stiles, Bureau of Chemistry, Washington, 
 D. C. 
 
 Address — "The National Pure Food Law from the Stand- 
 point of a Practical Oysterman," by Mr. Fred S. Beardsley, 
 Manager of the Stratford Oyster Company, Stratford, Conn. 
 
 Address — "A Commonsense View of the Pure Food Situa- 
 tion as between the Scientist and the Oysterman," by Dr. Her- 
 bert D. Pease, Bacteriologist of the Lederle Laboratories, for- 
 merly on New York Board of Health, New York City. 
 
 Address — "Scientific Oyster Culture and the Need of Public 
 Education Respecting the Oyster Industry," by Dr. H. F. Moore, 
 oyster expert of the Bureau of Fisheries, Washington, D. C. 
 
 In addition, many matters were discussed and a large num- 
 ber of questions asked based on suggestions inspired by the 
 several papers. 
 
 The meeting was very emphatic in the sentiment that the 
 pollution of streams and harbors should be prevented by the 
 state. Mr. N. S. Ackerly, of Northport, N. Y., stated that land 
 under public waters is the property of the owner by legislative 
 authority, and the municipality has no right to invade the private 
 rights of the individual by the deposit of sewage there. He 
 stated that there were two leading court cases on the pollution 
 of streams. 
 
 State of Missouri, St. Louis vs. Illinois, 200 U. S., 
 
 pp. 496. • 
 Huffmire vs. Brooklyn, 162 N. Y., pp. 584. 
 New York Court of Appeals, 175 N. Y., pp. 346, 
 Sammons vs. Gloversville. 
 
66 CONFERENCES. 
 
 The latter case applied specifically to oysters. A number of cases 
 in state and circuit courts have been tried, with decisions that 
 contamination must be stopped. 
 
 Mr. Beardsley's paper was an energetic statement of the 
 application of the federal requirements from the standpoint of a 
 practical oysterman. He claimed that the standards of purity 
 and salt content should be definitely established, and that the 
 prohibition of floating in water of a less content than the water 
 in which the oysters were grown was unreasonable. The entire 
 paper was very interesting and practical and has been published 
 in full by the Bridgeport Standard. 
 
 Dr. Pease read a very interesting paper treating particularly 
 the alleged dangers from the use of oysters. He said that it 
 was positively known that infected oysters had produced typhoid 
 fever. His paper gave very valuable suggestions for the use 
 of the State Board of Health. 
 
 He stated that neither colon bacilli nor typhoid bacilli grew 
 in oysters, although they can exist there. Greater danger exists 
 from contamination of a single house near an oyster bed than 
 from a large volume of sewage which flows over the ground in a 
 large volume of water. There would be very few cases of infec- 
 tion by typhoid pollution if oysters were taken directly from the 
 growing grounds and delivered to the consumer. Nearly all 
 cases of infection have come from oysters that have been trans- 
 ferred to other waters and floated, and then delivered. Each 
 state should have definite results of bacteriological study and 
 sanitary survey. 
 
 No case had been found where there had been any infection 
 of oysters which had not been floated in other waters than those 
 in which they were grown. Great care should be taken in the 
 discharge of any sewage by oyster boats while working on the 
 beds. The colon bacillus is always present in the digestive tracts 
 of human beings. This is not necessarily, however, productive 
 of disease, but may possibly be. 
 
 The general public is not yet greatly interested in the proper 
 disposal of sewage, or the contamination of oyster beds, and 
 should be educated along these lines. 
 
 Dr. H. F. Moore's paper was a very interesting discussion of 
 the production of oysters, giving very valuable suggestions as 
 to methods and details of the oyster industry. 
 
CONFERENCES. 67 
 
 The resolutions unanimously adopted at this convention were 
 as follows: 
 
 Whereas, An unfounded prejudice has heretofore existed in 
 the minds of some of the public against the healthfulness of the 
 oyster, which has had a tendency to curtail its use as a desirable 
 article of food, and 
 
 Whereas, The Federal Department of Agriculture, under the 
 leadership of Dr. Harvey W. Wiley, has adopted rules to insure 
 a high standard of purity in the production and distribution of 
 oysters for consumption in all parts of the country. Be it, there- 
 fore, 
 
 Resolved, That the Oyster Growers and Dealers Associa- 
 tion of North America, in convention assembled, desires to go on 
 record as favoring any and all definite and reasonable measures 
 that may be adopted by the federal or any state authority to 
 secure the conduct of the business on absolutely sanitary lines — 
 and this association further pledges itself to do anything in its 
 power to produce and distribute only oysters which are wholesome 
 and absolutely safe for the use of any or all people of this great 
 country, and to cooperate with all national and state officials to 
 guarantee such results. And be it further 
 
 Resolved, That this body respectfully suggests to the pure 
 food authorities of the various states, for the sake of the benefits 
 to be derived through uniform ruling, that they base the inter- 
 pretation of all state pure food laws, as same pertain to the oyster 
 business, upon the provisions decided upon by the National 
 Department of Agriculture as outlined in Pure Food Decision 
 No. no. And be it further 
 
 Provided, That the Secretary of this association be instructed 
 to file copies of these resolutions with the health commissioners 
 of every state and with the National Board of Food and Drug 
 Inspection. 
 
 DR. HARVEY W. WILEY. 
 
 On the way to Mobile the Tax Commissioner had an inter- 
 view with Dr. Harvey W. Wiley, Chief of the Bureau of Chem- 
 istry, at Washington, relative to order F. I. D. No. no of the 
 Agricultural Department, regarding the growing of oysters in 
 polluted waters and the practice of floating oysters. 
 
 He stated that while certain oyster dealers claim that the 
 practice of "floating" or "drinking" oysters is necessary to 
 cleanse them from impurities, the real purpose is to bloat them 
 by floating in fresher water than that in which they were grown. 
 The process of endosmosis then takes place and the oyster 
 becomes bloated or enlarged. 
 
68 DR. HARVEY W. WILEY. 
 
 While the claim is made that the floated oyster is desired by 
 the trade, Dr. Wiley is of the opinion that it would not be so 
 if the trade only knew the taste and appearance of the natural 
 oyster. While the former is white, bloated, and tasteless, the 
 latter is a little yellow in color, salty, and tasty in the natural 
 size, and when familiar with it, is more acceptable to the general 
 public. 
 
 Dr. Wiley stated that pure food always means larger busi- 
 ness to the producer, and the same result would be evident as soon 
 as the oyster growers adapted themselves to the new regulations 
 of the agricultural department regarding oysters shipped in 
 interstate trade. 
 
 He stated that oysters grow, better in the fresher waters, 
 and also in waters that are contaminated, as there seems to be 
 more diatoms on which to feed. An oyster, however, will clear 
 itself of any impurities in a comparatively short time, and it is 
 perfectly proper to grow seed oysters in any polluted waters, if 
 the oysters are transferred to other oyster grounds where the 
 water is uncontaminated. In this pure water they will free them- 
 selves entirely from all impurities in one or two months. If any 
 floating is to be done, it should be in the waters over these beds, 
 which may be a little less salty and freer from impurities. 
 
 He stated that the food and drugs act used the expression, 
 "Anything that may be injurious to the health," and there is 
 no doubt but colon bacilli are injurious to the health, whether 
 or not they contain typhoid germs. 
 
 He stated that it is very desirable that the State Board of 
 Health have jurisdiction over a certain part of the oyster indus- 
 try, so that they may make examinations of all waters in which 
 oysters are grown and also insist upon a proper standard of 
 cleanliness in the oyster-opening houses, and in all the implements 
 and receptacles used in the industry. It was stated that the 
 standard of purity of waters, in which oysters are matured for 
 shipment, should not be less than the standard required in drink- 
 ing water. 
 
 Dr. Wiley stated that he and the other chemists of the 
 Bureau would be very willing to cooperate with the authorities 
 of Connecticut in an endeavor to remove all cause of suspicion 
 in connection with the Connecticut oyster industry. He stated 
 further that some oysters which were sent to him, as having been 
 
SCIENTIFIC OYSTER GROWING. 69 
 
 grown and matured on certain Connecticut oyster ground, were 
 the nicest he had ever eaten, and his friends confirmed this opinion. 
 
 SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION OF OYSTER 
 GROWING. 
 
 Because of the importance of the industry at present and its 
 future possibilities, together with the amount of revenue to be 
 derived therefrom, the State of Connecticut is under obligations 
 to the oyster industry of the State not only to require all reason- 
 able precautions to prevent contamination of harbor and coastal 
 waters, but in addition to provide some means for the scientific 
 investigation of the proper conditions to secure the best possible 
 results in the growth of oysters in Connecticut waters, similar 
 to the investigations carried on for the benefit of the agricultural 
 interests. Such information relative to the cause of the green 
 color, the failure of sets, best methods for securing proper 
 growth, effective means of exterminating enemies, etc., should be 
 available for the benefit of all those engaged in the oyster indus- 
 try, and should not be confined to the individual planters, as the 
 possible result of their own experience. Several of the coast 
 states have made considerable progress along these lines, and 
 much definite benefit to the oyster industry has resulted through 
 such scientific investigations. 
 
 The Board was of the opinion that the Connecticut Agricul- 
 tural Experiment Station in New Haven, under the direction of 
 Dr. E. H. Jenkins, would be best fitted for such investigation on 
 account of its location and equipment. The matter was taken up 
 with Dr. Jenkins, and the following letter relative thereto was 
 received from him : 
 
 THE CONNECTICUT AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT 
 STATION. 
 New Haven, Conn., December 12, 191 0. 
 W. H. Corbin, Tax Commissioner, 
 
 State Capitol, Hartford, Conn. 
 My dear Mr. Corbin: — 
 
 I have been considering the subject of oyster investigation 
 which you suggested to me the other night. Such biological 
 work is, of course, quite out of the direct line of our present 
 work, and yet, with suitable provision for it, Ave could arrange 
 to have it done at this station ; but on thinking the matter over, 
 it occurred to me that the work could be much more conveniently 
 and thoroughly done by the biological department of the Sheffield 
 Scientific School. I understand that arrangements are now being 
 completed for a marine laboratory, at least the land has been 
 already purchased. 
 
70 MARINE LABORATORY. 
 
 Professor Verrill and others who have been in that depart- 
 ment of Yale have done an immense amount of work in the study 
 of marine life and my own feeling is that no other institution or 
 agency in the State has anything like the facilities which Yale 
 affords, nor can the necessary knowledge for the work be as 
 conveniently supplied elsewhere. I, therefore, took the liberty 
 this morning of calling up my friend, Director R. H. Chittenden, 
 of the School, and suggested the matter to him. He told me 
 that it appealed to him as a kind of work which would be emi- 
 nently appropriate for their marine laboratory and he would 
 very much like to be in communication with you, personally, 
 on the subject. If, therefore, this suggestion seems to you worth 
 following, will you kindly communicate with him directly? Of 
 course, if you prefer to have the Station engaged in it, I shall be 
 glad to me.et you for further conference. 
 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 E. H. JENKINS. 
 
 As suggested by Dr. Jenkins, a conference was held with 
 Director Chittenden of the Sheffield Scientific School. He 
 expressed his interest in the plan and his confidence that definite 
 benefit to the oyster industry would result by such action with a 
 small expenditure of money. He announced that the Sheffield 
 Scientific School expects in time to have a well-equipped marine 
 laboratory at Savin Rock, where facilities for the work needed 
 to be done in such an investigation would be provided. In the 
 meantime the present laboratory may be used. He stated that 
 the expense of such work for the State would be very small when 
 carried on in connection with the regular work of the marine 
 laboratory. 
 
 At the request of the Board he later submitted the following 
 statement prepared by Professor Wesley R. Coe, professor of 
 biology at the Sheffield Scientific School, relative to the field of 
 investigation which might be covered : 
 
 It is now more than a half century since the cultivation of 
 oysters by artificial methods has been successfully practiced in the 
 waters of the State, and although the industry has grown to com- 
 paratively vast proportions its success has been due to a com- 
 bination of good judgment and skillful management on the part 
 of the planters, accompanied with the most favorable natural 
 conditions, rather than to any considerable encouragement on the 
 part of the State or national government. 
 
 And although, there is every reason to be proud of the repu- 
 tation which Long Island Sound has acquired, as one of the 
 foremost oyster-growing localities of the world, the experience 
 of other Atlantic states and other countries, particularly of 
 France, renders it practically certain that the remarkably favor- 
 
SCIENTIFIC OYSTER GROWING. 7 1 
 
 able natural conditions for the growth of the oyster are but 
 incompletely utilized. With the present ever-increasing demand 
 for bivalves of the best quality and guaranteed purity, the State 
 of Connecticut should no longer delay the fullest possible develop- 
 ment of the wonderful natural resources of her shell-fisheries. 
 
 Other countries and other States where the natural con- 
 ditions for oyster growing are far less favorable than here have 
 long since awakened to the advantages to be derived from a 
 scientific investigation into the biological conditions under which 
 the oyster grows, and have profited enormously in so doing. And 
 while the results of those studies are freely at the disposal of 
 our own oyster growers, yet it must be constantly borne in mind, 
 that although the same oyster may be grown either in Chesapeake 
 Bay or Long Island Sound, the conditions which surround it, 
 especially as regards food and natural enemies, are very different 
 in the two localities. 
 
 It may thus happen that a method of culture successful in 
 one region may result in failure if practiced elsewhere. Hence 
 it will not be safe for our planters to follow blindly the course 
 of culture and protection which has been found satisfactory in 
 Maryland, or New York, or Rhode Island. 
 
 The oyster grower knows that a difference of a few days 
 in the time when the shells are laid down for the reception of the 
 spat may make a profound difference in the set of young oysters. 
 For the best spawning period of the oyster in one locality lasts 
 but for a few days — perhaps two weeks — and the free-swimming 
 young, after remaining from one to two days at the surface of the 
 water, are forced to settle to the bottom, where they invariably 
 perish unless they are able to attach themselves to some hard 
 surface suitable for their reception. To supply suitable materials 
 for the attachment of these young oysters, the planters commonly 
 cover the bottom of their leased areas with the shells which 
 remain from the oysters opened the previous season. Sometimes 
 the set of young oysters on these shells is successful and some- 
 times not, and this in spite of the fact that the water was teeming 
 with spawn in the breeding season. The supply of spawn is 
 always sufficiently abundant when mature oysters are growing in 
 the immediate vicinity, for a single female oyster may discharge 
 several millions of eggs. Why, then, the failure of the spawn to 
 set? 
 
 Recent investigations have shown that the dead shells when 
 spread for the reception of the spawn quickly, sometimes even 
 in the course of a few days, become covered with a slimy deposit 
 of such a nature as to prevent the attachment of the young oyster. 
 Hence the importance of knowing with certainty the average 
 time of spawning for each locality, for if the shells are spread too 
 early the set may fail and if spread too late may be insufficient. 
 
72 MARINE LABORATORY. 
 
 Then again, take the natural enemies of the oyster. Less than 
 one egg in a million succeeds in developing into a mature oyster. 
 What, besides the lack of sufficient material to receive the spat 
 when the spawn settles to the bottom, causes such wholesale 
 destruction of these creatures? Are changes in the temperature 
 of the water responsible? Or salinity? Or scarcity of food? Or 
 over-crowding? Or smothering by accumulations of mud? Or 
 are there many other animals which, naturally feed on the growing 
 oyster? We may answer that all these agencies, and doubtless 
 others play their parts, and the further development of the oyster 
 industry of the State must depend in large measure on the deter- 
 mination of means by which this destruction may be to some 
 extent mitigated. 
 
 Given normal conditions, a small fraction of one per cent, of 
 the free-swimming embryos will escape such enemies and other 
 destructive agencies, as they encounter in this stage of their 
 existence, and will succeed in establishing themselves upon suit- 
 able objects and begin to grow. As the young oyster increases 
 in size other enemies appear on every hand ; fish, molluscs, and 
 star-fish await it. The few which escape may grow for a year 
 or two, or more, and then fall a prey to the ravages of drill or 
 star-fish. Of the enemies of the fully grown oyster the star-fish 
 is by far the deadliest, and the planter knows that his oyster bed 
 can be saved only by his continual vigilance. 
 
 Nowhere in the world is the star-fish so destructive to the 
 oyster as in Long Island Sound and Narragansett Bay. Any 
 discoveries that could abate this nuisance would be worth more to 
 the oyster-growing interests of the State than the cost of a fully 
 equipped biological station for a century. 
 
 It is not expected that any such complete success will come 
 from the establishment of such a station, any more than the agri- 
 cultural interests of the State expect that the San Jose scale or 
 the potato beetle will be exterminated by the state entomologist, 
 but it is a well-demonstrated fact that the money expended on 
 insect investigations is returned tenfold to people of the State, 
 and that without such investigations successful agriculture would 
 hardly be possible. 
 
 And while far-reaching discoveries are not promised in the 
 contemplated biological station, it is expected that investigations 
 of value will be made. Information regarding any of the follow- 
 ing topics can hardly fail to be of service : 
 
 (a) The possibility of considerably extending the 
 present limits of the oyster beds both by experimentation with 
 new areas and by artificial means such as the use of sand, 
 shells, brush, tile, or by changing somewhat the topography 
 of the bottom, make certain hitherto unsuitable areas avail- 
 able. 
 
SCIENTIFIC OYSTER GROWING. 73 
 
 (b) By determining accurately the height of the spawn- 
 ing season in several localities during a series of years. 
 
 (c) By improved methods of collecting spat for plant- 
 ing in different localities. 
 
 (d) In utilizing the sewage-polluted areas of harbors, 
 teeming with food for the young oysters, to be subsequently 
 transplanted to the pure waters of the Sound. 
 
 (e) In determining, bacteriologically, what areas are 
 polluted and hence unfitted for market oysters. 
 
 (f) In recommending sanitary precautions which will 
 tend to inspire public confidence in the healthfulness and 
 safety of this most delicious food, at present so commonly 
 looked upon with suspicion and by many refused altogether 
 unless cooked. 
 
 (g) In a biological study of the food supply of various 
 localities both for oysters and clams. 
 
 (h) In investigating the enemies and other destructive 
 agencies of the spawn, spat, and young oyster. 
 
 (i) In a biological study of the drill and other molluscan 
 enemies. 
 
 (j) In a biological study of the star-fish, and the utili- 
 zation of means for holding it in check. 
 
 These are but a portion -of the problems which would 
 naturally be undertaken by such a biological station during a 
 series of years. The results are certain to be a value far in 
 excess of the small outlay necessary for its maintenance, for 
 accurate information on a single one of the topics, suggested 
 above, would enable the oyster planter to take advantage of 
 opportunities for economy and profit of which he is now deprived 
 because the conditions are unknown. 
 
 No less certain to yield profitable returns are investigations 
 regarding the culture of the two species of clams, which should 
 become a much more important industry than is at present the 
 case. 
 
 And finally, there is no other locality in the State so favor- 
 able for the prosecution of these studies as New Haven, situated 
 as it is in the very center of the coast, the seat of our greatest 
 oyster-growing system, and with the extensive laboratory facili- 
 ties and libraries of Yale available for biological and bacterio- 
 logical studies. Already the Sheffield Scientific School has secured 
 a plot of land at Savin Rock favorably situated for such a 
 station for which plans have been in progress for several years. 
 
 The state of New Jersey has conducted such research work 
 for several years under the direction of Dr. Julius Nelson, pro- 
 fessor of biology at Rutgers College, and has obtained very 
 satisfactory results. The act providing for the same is as 
 follows : 
 
74 SCIENTIFIC OYSTER GROWING. 
 
 An act to amend an act entitled "An act to provide for the 
 scientific investigation of oyster propagation," approved 
 March twenty-first, one thousand nine hundred and one. 
 
 Be it enacted by the Senate and General Assembly of the 
 State of New Jersey: 
 
 I. The director of the New Jersey Agricultural College 
 Experiment Station at New Brunswick is hereby authorized to 
 establish and to maintain one or more stations for the scientific 
 investigation of oyster propagation and other ostreacultural prob- 
 lems, said station or stations to be situated at some point or 
 points in the oyster-growing sections of this state ; to procure 
 a boat or boats adapted to the prosecution of the aforementioned 
 research work ; to have the same equipped with suitable apparatus ; 
 to engage such expert or experts and the services of such other 
 persons as may be needed in the maintenance of the ostreacul- 
 tural studies so undertaken, and to transmit, annually, to the 
 governor a full and detailed report of the scientific operations 
 under this act in the reports of the agricultural college experi- 
 ment stations; the amount authorized to be expended under the 
 provisions of this act shall not exceed the sum of twelve hundred 
 dollars in any one year; provided, that no moneys shall be drawn 
 from the state treasury for the purpose of this act until the same 
 shall have been specifically appropriated according to law. 
 « 2. This act shall take effect immediately. 
 
 The Board recommends that a portion of the money now 
 spent for oyster police, inspectors of dumping, and buoying the 
 natural beds be appropriated for the conduct of a scientific 
 investigation of oyster propagation, under the direction of 
 Director R. H. Chittenden of the Sheffield Scientific School ; the 
 results of which ought to be very advantageous to the oyster 
 industry in general in its returns to the State and to the different 
 individuals engaged in the business in the profits accruing to 
 themselves. 
 
 It is recommended that an appropriation of eight hundred 
 dollars per annum be made for such work.* 
 
 NONRESIDENT HOLDINGS OF OYSTER FRANCHISES 
 
 Section 3215, of the General Statutes, as amended by Chapter 
 66 of Public Acts of 1907, provides : 
 
 Said commissioners shall also be empowered, in the name 
 and behalf of the state, to grant by written instruments, for the 
 purpose of planting and cultivating shell-fish, perpetual franchises 
 in such undesignated grounds within said area as are not and for 
 ten years have not been natural clam or oyster beds, whenever 
 application in writing is made to them through their clerk by any 
 
NONRESIDENT HOLDINGS. 75 
 
 person or persons who have resided in the state not less than one 
 year next preceding the date of said application, or by any joint 
 stock company or corporation organised under the laws of this 
 state, all the stockholders of which are citizens of this state. 
 (The italics are used for emphasis.) 
 
 This statute was apparently the outcome of a requirement 
 made in 1848, that any person who had not been an actual inhabi- 
 tant or resident for six months next preceding, should not take, 
 rake, or gather any oysters in any of the rivers, bays, or waters 
 of this State. Such restrictions were continued when definite 
 franchise grants were made to private owners. Now that a large 
 number of the oyster properties are owned by corporations, the 
 specific requirement of the statute, that all the stockholders must 
 be citizens of this State, is almost impossible to carry out. 
 
 The General Assembly of 1907 passed the following bill, 
 validating the designation of shell-fish grounds: 
 
 All designations heretofore made by the Shell-Fish Com- 
 missioners to any persons, including nonresidents, of grounds 
 for the purpose of planting and cultivating shell-fish, and all 
 transfers of such grounds to any person or corporation, including 
 nonresidents, are hereby validated and confirmed. 
 
 As stated in the report of the Shell-Fish Commissioners, a 
 measure similar in its character to the above was passed by the 
 New York legislature, whereby all Connecticut holders of shell- 
 fish grounds in Suffolk County, N. Y., were confirmed in their 
 titles up to that date, and as there were then large interests in 
 both states held by nonresidents, a thing technically contrary 
 to the laws of both states, these enactments remove any. cloud 
 resting upon such titles up to that time and validate and confirm 
 such valuable holdings. Since 1907 other transfers have been 
 made by owners of Connecticut franchises to nonresidents and 
 such procedure is absolutely certain to take place in the detail of 
 such business transactions. 
 
 The restriction, which requires the oyster franchises of 
 Connecticut to be held only by residents of this State, or cor- 
 porations organized in this State, is continually being violated, 
 and will require further validating acts to legalize. In addition, 
 if it could be enforced, it would limit the business operations and 
 developments of the oyster properties, would hamper the growth 
 of the industry both offshore and on shore, and keep down the 
 amount of property which would be rightly taxable in the State. 
 
76 FEDERAL BUREAU OF FISHERIES. 
 
 This Board has recommended that the natural oyster 
 grounds be leased only to Connecticut citizens, which seems very 
 desirable, but the Board sees no reason for continuing the statute 
 which requires the oyster franchises to be held by residents of 
 this State. The Board, therefore, definitely recommends that 
 that part of Section 3215 of the general statutes which makes 
 this requirement be amended, so that the transfer of oyster 
 franchises by the owners thereof be not restricted. 
 
 FEDERAL BUREAU OF FISHERIES. 
 
 The Bureau of Fisheries of Washington, under the direction 
 of the Department of Commerce and Labor, has been collating 
 statistics of the oyster industry in New England for the fiscal 
 year 1910. The work in Connecticut was commenced the latter 
 part of September. At the request of the Board, the Com- 
 missioner of Fisheries, Mr. George M. Bowers, assigned an 
 additional man to hasten the work of securing the statistics in 
 Connecticut so that the figures might be available for this report. 
 
 It will be noticed that the totals secured by the statisticians 
 under the direction of the Bureau of Fisheries, relative to the 
 number of bushels of oysters taken from the private beds, very 
 largely exceed those submitted to the Board in the different 
 individual reports of the Connecticut oyster growers. 
 
 The information thus given is very important, and the thanks 
 of the Board and of the State are due the Bureau of Fisheries 
 for its cooperation and courtesy in furnishing the information 
 relative to the Connecticut oyster industry. 
 
 The data submitted are as follows : 
 
STATISTICS OF BUREAU OF FISHERIES. 77 
 
 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND LABOR, 
 BUREAU OF FISHERIES. 
 
 Statistics of the Oyster Industry of Connecticut for the Year 
 
 Ending June 30, 1910. 
 
 Persons employed : Number. Value. 
 
 On vessels fishing 657 
 
 On vessels transporting 22 
 
 In shore or boat fisheries 535 
 
 Shoresmen 1,489 
 
 Total 2, 703 
 
 Vessels, boats, apparatus, etc. 
 
 Vessels fishing 161 $596,115 
 
 Net tonnage 3.863 
 
 Vessels transporting 8 53, 700 
 
 Net tonnage 412 
 
 Boats 554 43,632 
 
 Apparatus — vessel fisheries: 
 
 Dredges 638 10,133 
 
 Mops 77 1,475 
 
 Apparatus — shore fisheries : 
 
 Dredges 191 966 
 
 Tongs, rakes, etc 468 2,639 
 
 Mops 2 10 
 
 Shore property 403, 160 
 
 Total $1,183,719 
 
 Private oyster grounds owned : 
 
 State grounds acres 74,151. S5 $1,759,968 
 
 Town grounds " 5,027.00 109,734 
 
 Private oyster grounds under culture : 
 
 State grounds acres 25,292.65 
 
 Town grounds " 1,978.60 
 
 Planted during the year " . 5,955.05 
 
 Materials planted during the year: 
 
 Seed oysters bushels 219,923 $107,889 
 
 Oyster shells " 3,186,001 234,895 
 
 Gravel, etc cubic yards 215,490 2,656 
 
 Total $345,450 
 
 Products from private areas : 
 
 Market oysters bushels 1,324,225 $801,790 
 
 Seed oysters " 1,754,472 975,266 
 
 Products from public areas : 
 
 Market oysters bushels 25,790 24,270 
 
 Seed oysters " 167,513 84,168 
 
 Oyster shells " 112,300 7,265 
 
 Total 3,384,300 $1,892,759 
 
 Oysters on private areas at the end of the year 
 
 bushels 3,784,175 $1,856,285 
 
 Products of the wholesale trade : 
 
 Market oysters sold in the shell bushels 512,379 $ 382,437 
 
 Oysters sold opened gallons 1,082,960 1,168,761 
 
 Seed oysters sold or transferred to . 
 
 other states bushels 932,958 511,139 
 
 Oyster shells sold " 470,050 26,282 
 
 Total .7 $ 2,088,619 
 
 Note. — The above value for private oyster grounds is the assessed value. 
 
 The value of oysters on the beds at the end of the year includes that of stakes, 
 
 buoys and marks. 
 A large proportion of the oysters opened are from other states. 
 
78 RECEIPTS FROM TAXATION. 
 
 COMPARATIVE FINANCIAL TABLES. 
 
 Receipts and Expenses as shown in Shell-Fish Com- 
 missioners' Report for 1910. 
 
 1908-1909. 
 Receipts. 
 
 Taxes collected $11,892.62 
 
 Natural bed licenses 1,002.00 
 
 Total $12,894.62 
 
 Certain Expe?ises. 
 
 Buoying natural beds $1,116.70 
 
 Oyster police 2,753.00 
 
 Inspecting natural beds 600.00 
 
 Mud dumping 740.00 
 
 Total ' $5,209.70 
 
 Available balance $7,684.92 
 
 1909-1910. 
 Receipts. 
 
 Taxes collected $26,141.58 
 
 Natural bed licenses 650.00 
 
 Total $26,791.58 
 
 Certain Expenses. 
 
 Buoying natural beds $1,237.30 
 
 Oyster police 2,806.00 
 
 Inspecting natural beds 600.00 
 
 Mud dumping 601.70 
 
 Total $5, 245 . 00 
 
 Available balance ' $21,546.58 
 
ESTIMATED RECEIPTS FROM TAXATION. 
 
 79 
 
 O 
 
 Q 
 fa 
 
 < 
 
 o 
 i— i 
 
 H 
 <J 
 X 
 <1 
 E-i 
 
 fa 
 O 
 
 w 
 
 H 
 
 CO 
 CO 
 
 fa 
 
 fa W 
 fa ffi 
 Q H 
 
 §2 
 
 H 
 
 <1 
 N 
 
 fa 
 < 
 
 w 
 
 fa 
 o 
 
 fi 
 
 fa 
 < 
 o 
 
 PQ 
 
 w o 
 
 O fa 
 
 fa fa 
 fa fa 
 
 Q 
 fa 
 fa 
 < 
 
 H 
 
 CO 
 
 fa 
 
 <§©= 
 
 G 
 
 O 
 u 
 
 faC 
 
 4) <U 
 
 2x 
 
 c 
 bo 
 
 ~ •* -S 
 
 O-- <^3 
 
 c y 
 
 05 XI 
 
 
 @a 
 
 C oj 
 
 O *j 
 
 %5 
 
 o> re 
 
 y < 
 
 XI CO 
 
 §1 
 
 " O (j 
 
 3 O 1~ 
 
 2 ~ t« 
 55 
 
 o. o 
 
 CO " 
 
 fa 
 
 O 
 
 35 8 
 
 o o o 
 o a - 
 
 fa 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 T3 
 
 C 
 73 
 O 
 u 
 bfl 
 
 o d x 
 
 a 
 o 
 bJO 
 
 C O 
 
 Oh 
 
 - e 
 
 x 6 o 
 
 ^ d m u 
 
 1.2® w 
 
 a, 5 
 
 re ,Q 
 
 ۩= 
 
 Oh » 
 
 a o 
 
 ^ a 
 
 3 <J 
 
 c >-. 
 
 ۩= 
 
 w ^ -< 
 
 ■2 
 
 fa 
 
 O cfl 
 O U 
 in 3 
 
 J5 
 
 O O o 
 
 O 3 > 
 
 "2-a 8 
 
 ^2 « 
 fa 
 
 re 
 
 o 
 H 
 
 
 re 
 O 
 
 H 
 
 2 
 
 
 fa 
 fa 
 
 CO 
 
 <! 
 
 fa 
 
 25 
 O 
 
 fa 
 fa 
 
 H £ 
 < fa 
 
 fa 
 
 o 
 
 -< 
 
 fa 
 
 fa 
 fa 
 fa 
 
 fa 
 
 co ffi 
 
 * H 
 
 fa 
 55 
 
 fa 
 fa 
 fa 
 
 fa 
 
 CO 
 
 H 
 fa 
 
 fa 
 
 fa 
 fa 
 
 fa 
 
 CO 
 
 I—* 
 
 55 
 
 fa 
 fa 
 fa 
 
 CO 
 
 O 
 
 fa 
 
 O 
 
 fa H 
 
 fa co 
 i— i 
 
 fa < 
 
 < 
 
 l— H 
 
 H 
 
 co 
 
 fa 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 in 
 
 o 
 
 m 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 <+ 
 
 vo 
 
 hH 
 
 fr 
 
 ON 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 •^ -H 01 
 
 -a 
 a 
 
 3 
 O 
 u 
 bfl 
 
 CJ « H 
 rt > X 
 L4 >H !H (-T 
 
 a- as 
 d o o -« 
 
 c3 • <U 
 
 bfl 
 
 3 j 
 
 4-1 2 
 
 Dh O 
 
 Oh 
 
 
 X2 co 
 
 c 8^ 
 
 
 o _ 
 
 O CJ 
 O 3 
 
 &£ 
 
 fa 
 
 O i_ 
 ° 3 
 
 O O 
 O 3 
 
 -TO 
 
 ^"2 
 fa 
 
 o 
 
 u 
 
 if) 
 
 O rt 3 
 rt fa -° 
 u >- u c" ^. 
 tu Oh cu C rt 
 
 buQ 
 
 
 \1 
 
 Oh 
 
 - . 
 
 o 
 
 IH <H-( 
 
 ®ci 
 
 a 5 
 
 3 3 
 03-° 
 
 C ^H 
 
 _ <u 
 
 Oh 
 
 (U 
 
 (U 3 
 
 Oh O 
 
 h i 9 
 
 03 
 
 I- >, 
 
 4J 
 
 X co 
 
 J> 
 
 cv, re 
 
 ^ < 
 
 o 
 o "13 
 
 o CJ 
 O 3 
 
 -2 
 
 fa 
 
 ^ O ^ 
 
 8-° 
 
 O aj 
 
 O r1 
 
 o 3 
 ,5 
 
 ©I® 
 
 U X X5 
 
 ^■S§ 
 
 o o o 
 O S -- 
 
 ■?•§ 8 
 
 fa 
 
 ۩= 
 
 re 
 O 
 
 H 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 u-> 
 
 o 
 
 in 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 "* 
 
 rf 
 
 ON 
 
 
 VO 
 
 
 
 t^ 
 
 €fe= 
 
 
 
 
 ۩= 
 
 
 
So SHELL-FISH COMMISSION AND MAPS. 
 
 SHELL-FISH COMMISSION. 
 
 So long as the present system of taxation is continued, 
 which requires the clerk of the Shell-Fish Commission to act 
 as an assessor and the members of the Commission as a board 
 of relief, it is undoubtedly desirable that it consist of three mem- 
 bers. Investigations of the Board have demonstrated the very 
 great advantage of a practical knowledge of the oyster business 
 in considering any subjects relative thereto. This advantage 
 would apply as well to the Shell-Fish Commission as to the 
 Board. Considering, therefore, the many matters which must be 
 considered by the Shell-Fish Commissioners, which require a 
 technical knowledge of the oyster industry, it seems to the Board 
 very desirable that one of the three members be a practical oyster- 
 man, as is required in several states. Such a person should have 
 had at least ten years' experience in growing oysters in this 
 State. Such a recommendation is hereby definitely made. 
 
 If, however, the method of taxation should be changed to 
 that recommended by the Board, a commission of three members 
 would be no longer necessary. In that event, the Board recom- 
 mends that the law be changed to provide for a single-headed 
 commission and that all references relative to disputed boundaries 
 be submitted to the superior court for adjudication. Such action 
 would enable an increased salary to be paid to the Commissioner, 
 as an executive officer, would permit greater demands on his 
 time for the work required, would focus responsibility, and prob- 
 ably would result in more definite supervision. 
 
 MAPS. 
 
 The maps that accompany this report ought to be self- 
 explanatory. Briefly, however, the purpose of the first is to 
 show the location of all oyster franchise ground under the 
 State's jurisdiction outside the town lines occupied under pri- 
 vate ownership at the present time, also the location of the 
 natural beds. On the same map there is shown in colors the 
 approximate location of the hard ground, also the so-called soft 
 or muddy ground. 
 
 The maps in the folder, the tracings of which are used by 
 the courtesy of the Shell-Fish Commission, show the per acre 
 assessed valuation of the different lots, varying from five dollars 
 
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS FOR ASSISTANCE. 81 
 
 to one hundred fifty dollars per acre. The purpose of this 
 is to show the assessed valuations of the different contiguous 
 lots, and to give an opportunity for criticism and for suggestions, 
 so that inequalities may be overcome in the future, if the present 
 system of taxation is to be continued. 
 
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. 
 
 The Board wishes to express its appreciation of the courte- 
 ous and helpful attitude of the different members of the Shell- 
 Fish Commission. 
 
 The Chairman, Mr. George C. Waldo, who has filled that 
 position continuously since 1893, and who has been a member 
 of the Commission since 1889, has been of particular assistance 
 in giving the Board the benefit of his long experience in, and 
 definite knowledge of, the oyster industry. 
 
 The Board is under great obligations to Mr. Frederick L. 
 Perry, the clerk of the Shell-Fish Commission, for his accurate 
 legal knowledge of the many technical features connected with 
 the Connecticut system of granting and taxing oyster franchises ; 
 for his fair and unprejudiced attitude towards all questions 
 involved ; for his manifest desire to enable the Board to secure 
 all the necessary information on any phase of the oyster industry, 
 and finally for the time given in attending many meetings with 
 the Board and its separate members, all of which, with the valu- 
 able counsel mentioned above, has been given without any charge 
 whatever for his services. 
 
 Captain William A. Lewis, the Inspector of natural beds, 
 has rendered the Board definite services in giving it important 
 information relative to the nature and use of the natural beds. 
 
 It would have been almost impossible for the Board to have 
 acquired sufficient knowledge of the many details of the oyster 
 industry in so short a time without such aid as was given by 
 Captain E. Frank Lockwood. The Board received the benefit 
 of his wide experience, his practical knowledge of relative values, 
 and his complete familiarity with every detail of the business. 
 
 All the members of the State Board of Health, and particu- 
 larly its president, Dr. Edward K. Root, and its secretary, Dr. 
 Joseph H. Townsend, have been very willing to cooperate with 
 the Board in securing information relative to polluted grounds. 
 
82 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS. 
 
 Mr. James A. Newlands, the chemist, has been of particular 
 assistance in working out the data which are included in the 
 very enlightening and satisfactory report of the condition of 
 New Haven Harbor given elsewhere. This work was under- 
 taken by vote of the State Board of Health without any specific 
 appropriation for the same, and the results attained show con- 
 clusively the value of such an investigation. The finding is a 
 very important part of this report and the cooperation which 
 brought it about has been particularly appreciated by the Board 
 of Equalization. 
 
 A large number of the oyster growers have been very help- 
 ful in furnishing specific information relative to the many details 
 and methods employed in the conduct of their business. The 
 completion of this report in its practical suggestions would have 
 been impossible without such assistance. 
 
 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS. 
 
 The different recommendations have been fully discussed 
 and the reasons given therefor in other parts of the report. For 
 convenience, however, they are herewith summarized and refer- 
 ence given to the page of the report containing the general 
 discussion. 
 
 It is recommended : 
 
 i. That the law which provides for the granting of grounds 
 under the perpetual franchise system be amended to provide for 
 the leasing of such ground under State jurisdiction, which is 
 not already allotted to private owners, together with all land which 
 shall revert to the State from those holding the same under 
 franchises. (Page 30.) 
 
 2. That the law providing for the policing of the oyster 
 ground by the State be repealed, and a statute enacted which 
 will provide a liberal bounty for the detection and conviction 
 of any one stealing oysters or committing other offences against 
 the shell-fish laws. (Page 31.) 
 
 3. That the statute relative to mud or refuse dumping be 
 amended so that the expenses of the inspectors shall be paid 
 by the contractors. (Page 32.) 
 
 4. That the law requiring buoys to be set at the expense 
 of the State be repealed. (Page 33.) 
 
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS. S3 
 
 5. That the law taxing the oyster franchises be amended 
 to provide for a minimum valuation of ten dollars per acre on 
 all ground held under such franchises at the present tax rate 
 of fifteen mills, and in addition a productivity tax of two or 
 three cents per bushel upon all seed or other oysters taken from 
 such grounds in this State for sale, or for the purpose of removal 
 out of the State. The act also should provide for confidential 
 reports by the producers and a proper system of state inspection 
 of the same, all to be under the direction and supervision of 
 the Shell-Fish Commissioners, also that the provisions of the 
 law providing for present assessor and board of relief be repealed. 
 (Page 42.) 
 
 6. That the natural beds, as described in the general stat- 
 utes, be abolished and such territory leased to citizens of the 
 State for a definite term of years subject to renewal, at an annual 
 rental of one dollar per acre in addition to a productivity tax 
 of two or three cents per bushel. (Page 49.) 
 
 7. That laws be enacted which will prevent contamination 
 through new sources by sewage and other disease-breeding wastes 
 of harbors, rivers and coastal waters of the State, and further 
 provisions be enacted which will require within a reasonable 
 number of years the entire removal of such harmful substances 
 from the waters of the State. (Page 58.) 
 
 8. That the State Board of Health be authorized and 
 required to make a sanitary investigation of the harbor and 
 coastal waters of the State where oysters are grown, and to give 
 certificates attesting the purity of all grounds which are proper 
 for maturing market oysters and to withhold certificates from 
 all other oyster grounds, and to forbid the sale in any towns in 
 this State of oysters taken from beds which are not certified to 
 be satisfactory. (Page 60.) 
 
 9. That the State Board of Health by its agents be author- 
 ized and required to inspect, at varying intervals, the opening 
 houses in the State, employing the score card system similar to 
 that used in Rhode Island, and to secure proper sanitary sur- 
 roundings and conditions in all such houses and in any pro- 
 cesses connected with the. work of opening and shipping oysters. 
 (Page 62.) 
 
 10. That an appropriation of eight hundred dollars per 
 annum be made for the conduct of a scientific investigation of 
 
84 RECAPITULATION. 
 
 oyster growing in Connecticut waters by the Marine Laboratory 
 of the Sheffield Scientific School. (Page 69.) 
 
 11. That Section 32 15 of the General Statutes be amended 
 to permit the transfer of perpetual franchises of oyster grounds 
 to any nonresident person or persons, or to any nonresident joint 
 stock company or corporation. (Page 75.) 
 
 12. That one member of the Shell-Fish Commission shall 
 be a practical oysterman who has had at least ten years' experi- 
 ence in the growing of oysters in this State. (Page 80.) 
 
 RECAPITULATION. 
 
 The oyster business has grown from a small beginning to 
 one of large magnitude. This has been brought about by the. 
 persistent energy of the oyster growers, who by artificial devel- 
 opment have made the most of certain natural opportunities. 
 Those engaged in the industry are fine types of successful men, 
 reasonable, businesslike, and fair, and yet always working for 
 the advancement of their vocation. 
 
 The oyster industry in the long run is as satisfactory as, 
 and not much more hazardous than, that of raising tobacco, or 
 conducting a manufacturing plant with the uncertainties of tariff 
 and other legislation. 
 
 The government regulations requiring certain sanitary pre- 
 cautions in interstate shipments cannot be considered other than 
 reasonable, and for the protection of the consumer. It is certain 
 also that their rigid enforcement will increase the public confi- 
 dence in the product. And once it is realized that oysters grown 
 under sanitary surroundings can be delivered to any part of the 
 United States in proper condition for use, the demand for this 
 cheap and palatable food will increase to such an extent that 
 it will be necessary to very largely develop its productive capacity 
 to provide a sufficient supply. 
 
 While at the public hearings which the Board held last 
 spring the oyster growers complained that the publicity given 
 by the Department of Agriculture to certain alleged dangers in 
 the use of oysters as a food would arouse suspicion and would 
 seriously interfere with a successful business, the actual facts 
 during the fall season are that the demand for oysters has been 
 even greater than in previous years. This actually shows the 
 
RECAPITULATION. 85 
 
 good results of such publicity by the increased confidence which 
 the sanitary requirements of the federal government have given 
 to the consumers of this food product. 
 
 Practically all the recommendations, which the Board is mak- 
 ing, have been discussed in detail with different oyster growers. 
 They have at various times, in conversation with the different 
 members of the Board, admitted that the suggested changes would 
 be desirable. They have even conceded that the present system 
 of taxation is almost impossible to carry out with any degree of 
 equality, and that the proposed plan of a minimum franchise tax, 
 with a production tax in addition, would be fairer, in requiring 
 only a reasonable tax whenever a poor condition of the business 
 exists and increased return to the State whenever conditions are 
 more productive. A large number of the oyster growers have 
 definitely expressed themselves as being perfectly willing to pay 
 a reasonable tax, if the State would do its part in taking steps 
 to remove the contamination of the harbors and coastal waters, 
 and would provide reasonable means for an investigation of the 
 best methods of oyster growing similar to those carried on by 
 other states and similar to those conducted for other industries 
 in this State. 
 
 The duty of investigating the oyster properties and business 
 was imposed upon the Board unsought. The General Assembly 
 of 1909 apparently wished that specific information relative to 
 the subject be secured and presented to the General Assembly 
 of 191 1. In formulating the report the Board has had in mind 
 the fact that very few people have any clear idea of the nature 
 or development of the oyster industry. The purpose has been, 
 therefore, to provide sufficient information so that the Committee 
 on Shell-Fisheries and other interested members of the General 
 Assembly will be able to secure a fair and definite knowledge 
 of the entire subject. 
 
 As stated previously, the Board has discussed the recom- 
 mendations, which it is making, with the oyster planters suffi- 
 ciently to know that they are reasonable, desirable and practical. 
 If enacted into laws they will be for the real good of the oyster 
 industry, will bring about economies, and will insure an increased 
 revenue to the State. Any active opposition to their enactment 
 by the oyster growers would appear to be shortsighted. 
 
86 RECAPITULATION. 
 
 The Board does not feel in any way responsible for the 
 enactment into laws of its recommendations. The members of the 
 Board, individually, will be very willing to answer any questions 
 relative to the details of the report, to confer with the members 
 of the Committee on Shell-Fisheries, or to give any supplemental 
 information that the General Assembly may desire, and that it is 
 possible to secure. They will not, however, attempt to lobby any 
 measures through the legislature, nor try to persuade any of the 
 members to favor any particular recommendation, for the Board 
 considers that it has done its duty in presenting its findings to the 
 General Assembly, as required, and that its responsibility ceases 
 therewith. 
 
 Respectfully submitted, 
 
 /\<4/C&***'<z^i 
 
 Comptroller, 
 
 CO 
 
 Tax Commissioner, 
 THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION. 
 
VARIOUS LAWS 
 REGULATIONS AND BLANK FORMS 
 
 RELATIVE TO THE 
 
 OYSTER INDUSTRY 
 
FROM THE OYSTER LAW OF THE STATE OF LOUISIANA. 
 
 Section g. Be it further enacted, etc., That from and after 
 the passage of this Act the rentals on all leased water bottoms and 
 natural reefs made in conformity with the provisions of this 
 Act, shall not be less than one dollar (i.oo) per acre or any frac- 
 tion of an acre per year on all soft and hard bottoms and depleted 
 reefs and not less than five dollars ($5.00) per acre or any frac- 
 tion of an acre per year for all natural reefs, said amount to be 
 determined by the Board after the Chief Surveyor has reported 
 on same as provided herein. The rate named by the Board for 
 such leases shall be conclusive and final. 
 
 Sec. 11. Be it further enacted, etc., That each packer, canner, 
 commission man, dealer, firm, or corporation, shall keep a record 
 of all oysters purchased by himself or themselves, with the names 
 of the parties from whom purchased, the quantity, and the date. 
 They shall also keep an itemized account of all oysters fished by 
 themselves and by all boats controlled by them and shall exhibit 
 said account at all times to the Board of Commissioners for the 
 Protection of Birds, Game and Fish, or any of its authorized 
 employees. On the first day of each month said packer, canner, 
 commission man, dealer, firm, or corporation, shall make a return 
 under oath, to said Board as to the number of barrels purchased 
 and caught during the preceding month, and a tax of three (3) 
 cents per barrel on each and every barrel of oysters canned, 
 packed or gathered from the leased water bottoms and reefs, 
 either for sale or consumption, shall be levied thereon by said 
 Board. 
 
 Inspectors of said Board are authorized to enter upon any 
 boat, or to enter any building other than a domicile, where oysters 
 are carried or stored and to inspect such oysters at all times. 
 
 In all operations of the Board, the standard measurement of 
 the barrel referred to herein shall be three and seventy-three one- 
 hundredths (3.73) cubic feet, which approximately represents the 
 cubic contents of three (3) bushels, or one barrel. 
 
 (It is authoritively stated that a barrel of Connecticut oysters 
 in the shell will open up about three times more meats than a 
 barrel of Louisiana oysters.) 
 
 STATE OF RHODE ISLAND. 
 
 AN ACT IN AMENDMENT OF AND IN ADDITION TO CHAPTER 206 OF THE GENERAL 
 
 LAWS, ENTITLED ' r 0F THE PROTECTION OF THE SHELL-FISHERIES IN 
 
 THE PUBLIC WATERS OF THIS STATE." 
 
 It is enacted by the General Assembly as follows : 
 
 Section 1. Chapter 206 of the General Laws, entitled ''Of 
 the protection of the shell-fisheries in the public waters of this 
 state," is hereby amended to read as follows : 
 
90 STATE OF LOUISIANA. 
 
 Section I. No person shall deposit in, or allow to escape into, 
 or shall cause or permit to be deposited in, or allowed to escape 
 into, any of the public waters of this state, any substance which 
 shall in any manner injuriously affect the growth or sale of the 
 shell-fish in or under said waters, or which shall in any manner 
 affect the flavor or odor of such shell- fish so as to injuriously 
 affect the sale thereof, or which shall cause any injury to the pub- 
 lic and private fisheries of this state. 
 
 Sec. 2. Any person violating any of the provisions of this 
 act shall upon conviction thereof be fined not less than five 
 hundred dollars or more than two thousand dollars, one-half 
 thereof to the use of the complainant and one-half thereof to 
 the use of the state : Provided, that in case of conviction upon 
 prosecution by the commissioners of shell-fisheries, the whole or 
 any fine imposed shall go to the use of the state. 
 
 Sec. 3. Every person violating any of the provisions of this 
 act shall be liable to pay to the party injured by such violation 
 double the amount of damages caused thereby, to be recovered in 
 an action of the case in any court of competent jurisdiction. It 
 shall not be necessary, before bringing suit for recovery of such 
 damages, for a criminal prosecution to have been first instituted 
 for the violation of the provisions of this chapter, nor shall the 
 recovery of damages under this section be a bar to such criminal 
 prosecution. 
 
 Sec. 4. It shall be the duty of the commissioners of shell- 
 fisheries to investigate all complaints made to them of the viola- 
 tion of any of the provisions of this act. For the purpose 
 of such investigation said commissioners may make examination 
 of the premises, hold public hearings, summon witnesses, and take 
 testimony under oath, and they shall have power to punish, by 
 fine or imprisonment or both, all contempt of their authority in 
 any hearing before them. They may employ professional or 
 expert services, as they may deem desirable. 
 
 Sec. 5. It shall be the duty of the shell-fish commissioners 
 to prosecute any person in their opinion guilty of the violation 
 of any of the provisions of this chapter, and in all such prosecu- 
 tions said commissioners shall not be required to enter into any 
 recognizance or to give surety for costs. It shall be the duty of 
 the attorney-general to conduct the prosecution of all cases 
 brought by said commissioners under the provisions of this 
 chapter. Complaints may be also brought and prosecuted by any 
 citizen for any violation of its provisions. 
 
 Sec. 6. The expenses incurred by the commissioners of 
 shell-fisheries in the performance of the duties imposed upon them 
 by this chapter shall be paid by the general treasurer, out of any 
 funds in the treasury not otherwise appropriated, upon the pre- 
 sentation of vouchers, therefor duly certified by their chairman. 
 
OYSTER LAWS. 9 1 
 
 Sec. 7. The commissioners of shell-fisheries shall inspect the 
 premises designated in section 8 of this chapter at such times 
 as they may deem advisable, for the purpose of determining 
 whether said premises are kept in a proper sanitary condition 
 for opening, handling, or packing shell-fish for the trade. Also 
 said commissioners shall inspect the methods followed on the 
 premises in opening, packing, or preparing shell-fish for the trade, 
 to determine whether such methods are proper from a sanitary 
 standpoint. 
 
 Sec. 8. The premises which come within the scope of this 
 chapter are all establishments where oysters or other shell-fish 
 are opened, packed, or prepared for the trade. Retail or whole- 
 sale markets where shell-fish are sold which purchased from the 
 original opening or packing houses designated in this section shall 
 not come within the scope of this chapter. 
 
 Sec. 9. Said commissioners shall inspect any or all the leased 
 oyster grounds and other shell-fish grounds within the state at 
 such times as they may deem advisable, to determine whether 
 said grounds are in a proper sanitary condition for the produc- 
 tion of shell-fish for consumption as food. 
 
 Sec. 10. Said commissioners may make such regulations in 
 regard to sanitation as they may deem advisable, from time to 
 time, with reference to the sanitary handling of shell-fish and 
 with reference to maintaining opening or packing houses in a 
 proper sanitary condition. 
 
 Sec. 11. Said commissioners may issue certificates from 
 time to time to any person whose premises or grounds are found 
 by them to be in a sanitary condition, setting forth that they 
 have examined such opening or packing house or such shell- 
 fish ground and that the methods followed in the preparation 
 of oysters or other shell-fish in such opening or packing house 
 are sanitary and that the grounds inspected are in proper sanitary 
 condition for the production of shell-fish for consumption as 
 food. 
 
 Sec. 12. No person shall take shell-fish from any grounds 
 which are not certified by said commissioners as being in a 
 sanitary condition, except for the purpose of transplantation. No 
 person shall prepare shell-fish for the trade except on premises 
 and by methods certified by said commissioners as being sanitary. 
 Sec. 13. Any person who shall violate any sanitary regu- 
 lation made by said commissioners, as provided for in section 
 10, shall be fined $20 for the first offence, and for each subsequent 
 offence $100 and be imprisoned not more than ninety days in jail. 
 Any person violating the provisions of section 12 of this chapter 
 shall be fined $20 for the first offence, and for each subsequent 
 offence $100 and be imprisoned not more than ninety days in jail. 
 Sec. 14. It shall be the duty of the commissioners of shell- 
 fisheries to prosecute any person in their opinion guilty of the 
 
92 FEDERAL SCORE CARD. 
 
 violation of any of the provisions of this chapter, and in all such 
 prosecutions said commissioners shall not be required to enter 
 into any recognizance or to give surety for costs. It shall be the 
 duty of the attorney-general to conduct the prosecution of all 
 cases brought by said commissioners under the provisions of this 
 chapter. 
 
 Sec. 2. This act shall take effect upon its passage, excepting 
 the above sections numbered 12, 13, 14, which sections shall take 
 effect July 1, 1910, and the act numbered "Senate 136, Substitute 
 A," passed at the January session, A.D. 1910, and approved April 
 26, A.D. 1910, and all other acts and parts of acts inconsistent 
 herewith are hereby repealed. 
 
 Approved April 29, 1910. 
 
 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 
 
 BUREAU OF ANIMAL INDUSTRY, 
 DAIRY DIVISION. 
 
 SANITARY INSPECTION OF DAIRIES. 
 
 DAIRY SCORE CARD. 
 Adopted by the Official Dairy Instructors' Association. 
 
 Owner or lessee of farm 
 
 P. O. address State 
 
 Total number of cows Number milking 
 
 Gallons of milk produced daily 
 
 Product is retailed by producer in 
 
 Sold at wholesale to , 
 
 For milk supply of 
 
 Permit No Date of inspection , 191 , 
 
 Remarks 
 
 (Signed) 
 
 Inspector. 
 
FEDERAL SCORE CARD. 
 
 93 
 
 DETAILED SCORE. 
 
 EQUIPMENT. 
 
 cows. 
 Health 
 
 Apparently in good health i 
 
 If tested with tuberculin once 
 a year and no tuberculosis is 
 found, or if tested once in 
 six months and all reacting 
 
 animals removed 5 
 
 (If tested only once a year and 
 reacting animals found and re- 
 moved, 2.) 
 
 Comfort _ 
 
 Bedding i 
 
 Temperature of stable i 
 
 Food (clean and wholesome) 
 
 Water 
 
 Clean and fresh i 
 
 Convenient and abundant i 
 
 STABLES 
 
 Location of stable 
 
 Well drained i 
 
 Free from contaminating sur- 
 roundings i 
 
 Construction of stable 
 
 Tight, sound floor and proper 
 gutter 2 
 
 Smooth, tight walls and ceil- 
 ing i 
 
 Proper stall, tie, and manger, i 
 Light: Four sq. ft. of glass per 
 cow 
 
 (Three sq. ft., 3; 2sq. ft., 2; 1 sq. 
 ft., 1. Deduct for uneven distribu- 
 tion.) 
 Ventilation: Automatic system 
 
 Adjustable windows 1 
 
 Cubic feet of space for cow: 500 to 
 
 1,000 feet 
 
 (Less than 500 feet, 2; less than 
 400 feet, 1: less than 300 feet, o; 
 over 1,000 feet, o. ) 
 
 UTENSILS. 
 
 Construction and condition of 
 utensils 
 
 Water for cleaning 
 
 (Clean, convenient, and abun- 
 dant.) 
 
 Small-top milking pail 
 
 Facilities for hot water or steam... 
 (Should be in milk house, not in 
 
 kitchen.) 
 
 Milk cooler 
 
 Clean milking suits 
 
 MILK ROOM. 
 
 Location of milk room 
 
 Free from contaminating sur- 
 roundings 1 
 
 Convenient 1 
 
 Construction of milk room 
 
 Floor, walls, and ceiling 1 
 
 Light, ventilation, screens 1 
 
 Total 
 
 SCORE. 
 
 Perfect. 
 
 Allowed. 
 
 6 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 40 
 
 
 
 METHODS. 
 
 cows. 
 Cleanliness of cows 
 
 STABLES. 
 
 Cleanliness of stables 
 
 Floor 2 
 
 Walls 1 
 
 Ceiling and ledges 1 
 
 Mangers and partitions 1 
 
 Windows. 1 
 
 Stable air at milking time 
 
 Barnyard clean and well drained . 
 
 Removal of manure daily to field 
 
 or proper pit 
 
 (To 50 feet from stable, 1.) 
 
 MILK ROOM. 
 
 Cleanliness of milk room 
 
 UTENSILS AND MILKING. 
 
 Care and cleanliness of utensils. 
 Thoroughly washed and steril- 
 ized in live steam for 30 min- 
 utes 5 
 
 (Thoroughly washed and placed 
 over steam jet, 4; thoroughly 
 washed and scalded with boiling 
 ■water, 3; thoroughly washed, not 
 scalded, 2.) 
 
 Inverted in pure air 3 
 
 Cleanliness of milking 
 
 Clean, dry hands 3 
 
 Udders washed and dried ... 6 
 
 (Udders cleaned with moist 
 
 cloth, 4; cleaned with dry cloth at 
 
 least 15 minutes before milking, 1.) 
 
 HANDLING THE MILK. 
 
 Cleanliness of attendants 
 
 Milk removed immediately from 
 stable 
 
 Prompt cooling (cooled immedi- 
 ately after milking each cow) .. 
 
 Efficient cooling; below 50° F 
 
 (51° to 55 , 4; 56 to 6o°, 2.) 
 
 Storage; below 50 F 
 
 (51 to 55°, 2; 56 to 6o°, 1.) 
 
 Transportation; iced in summer .. 
 (For jacket or wet blanket, 
 
 allow 2; dry blanket or covered 
 
 wagon, 1.) 
 
 Total 
 
 Perfect. Allowed. 
 
 Equipment + Methods. 
 
 -Final Score. 
 
 Note i. — If any filthy condition is found, particularly dirty utensils, the total score shall be limited 
 
 tO 4Q. 
 
 Note 2. — If the water is exposed to dangerous contamination or there is evidence of the presence of 
 a dangerous disease in animals or attendants, the score shall be o. 
 
94 RHODE ISLAND INSPECTION CARD. 
 
 RHODE ISLAND COMMISSIONERS OF SHELL-FISHERIES. 
 
 INSPECTION OF OYSTER HOUSES. 
 
 Owner's Name 
 
 Opening House at 
 
 Date of Inspection 
 
 Inspector 
 
 Method of transportation from beds to opening house 
 
 Are floats used for holding stock 
 
 Number Condition 
 
 Location of floats " 
 
 Opening House. 
 
 Light Ventilation 
 
 Ceiling and walls 
 
 Floor, material Condition . . . 
 
 Bins. 
 
 Method of operating 
 
 Construction Properly emptied 
 
 Facilities for cleaning 
 
 Condition 
 
 Utensils. 
 
 Quality Condition 
 
 Properly washed How often . . . 
 
 Sterilized How often 
 
 Water. 
 
 Source Quality 
 
 Tank Construction Clean . . . 
 
 How frequently cleaned 
 
 Hot Water. 
 
 Method of heating Abundant 
 
 Steam. 
 
 Source Sterilizer 
 
 Ice. 
 
 Source Quality 
 
 Refrigerator Condition 
 
 How frequently cleaned 
 
 Employees. 
 
 Character of employees 
 
 Cases of illness among employees 
 
 Cases of illness in families of employees 
 
 Methods of Handling. 
 Use of gloves Aprons 
 
 Condition of clothing 
 
 Method of washing oysters 
 
 Length of time required 
 
 Method of cooling oysters 
 
 Length of time required 
 
RHODE ISLAND OPENING HOUSES. 95 
 
 Method of storing oysters 
 
 Length of time required 
 
 Kind of shipping cans 
 
 Condition Properly washed 
 
 Sterilized 
 
 Toilet Facilities. 
 
 Properly located Clean 
 
 Method of sewage disposal 
 
 Facilities for washing hands 
 
 Hot and cold water Towels Clean 
 
 Instruction of employees as to cleanliness by signs or 
 
 otherwise 
 
 Remarks. 
 
 PRELIMINARY SUGGESTIONS TO OWNERS OF 
 OYSTER HOUSES. 
 
 Office of the Commissioners of Shell-Fisheries of the State of 
 
 Rhode Island. 
 
 Location of Oyster Beds. For the protection of the con- 
 sumer it is necessary that the sale of oysters from beds which 
 are subject to sewage contamination be prohibited. It is without 
 doubt true that oysters thrive and grow rapidly in water con- 
 taining sewage. But because of the danger of the transmission 
 of diseases by sewage-grown oysters, and because no one wishes 
 to use as food oysters which have been exposed to sewage con- 
 tamination, steps have been taken to prevent the sale of such 
 oysters in interstate trade by the United States authorities, and 
 in State trade by the Commissioners of Shell-Fisheries of Rhode 
 Island. 
 
 Every endeavor is being made at present by both of these 
 authorities to prevent sewage contamination of waters in which 
 oysters are grown, and also to map out, as far as possible, the 
 location of present sewage pollution in these waters. Within a 
 short time it will be possible to advise the lessees of oyster 
 grounds whether or not their beds are free from pollution. At 
 the present time about all the information that can be given is 
 that oyster beds situated north of Conimicut and Nayatt Points 
 are not fit ground from which to market oysters, and the sale of 
 any oysters from these beds will be prohibited. The same applies 
 to oysters grown in Warren River above a line drawn from the 
 southern end of Rumstick Point to the Warren and Bristol town 
 line. These restrictions may be removed as soon as some of the 
 present sources of pollution are stopped. 
 
 Floating Oysters. Oysters may be polluted, after they are 
 removed from the growing beds, by being held in unclean water. 
 Holding oysters in floats in such a way that they come in contact 
 with water which is contaminated with sewage will not be allowed. 
 
96 RHODE ISLAND INSTRUCTIONS. 
 
 If such water is clean, and this can only be determined by analysis, 
 which will be made by the Commission on request, and if it is 
 practically as salt as the water in which the oysters are grown, 
 no harm can come from this practice. 
 
 Construction of the Opening Houses. Opening houses 
 should be well lighted and well ventilated. Dark, damp houses 
 are injurious to the health of those employed therein and are 
 conducive to dirt, dampness, and decay. Light and air are two of 
 the very best disinfectants. Walls, bins, benches, and floor should 
 be so constructed that they may be flushed with water and 
 scrubbed clean. All accumulation of shells and fragments of 
 oyster meat should be scrupulously avoided, as they decay rapidly. 
 Cleaning should be done at least every day. The ceiling should 
 be free from cobwebs and dust. A good brushing-down once 
 each season, and the application of a coat of whitwash or cold- 
 water paint, will add much to the cleanliness and light of the 
 place. Dust from above is much more apt to drop into opened 
 oysters than that on the floor. Screens at the windows and doors 
 will prevent flies from bringing contamination to the opened 
 oysters. 
 
 Bins. If bins are used for holding the oysters before they 
 are opened, they should be so constructed that all of the oysters 
 are delivered to the openers. No beams or corners should be 
 left where the oysters collect. One or two old oysters from 
 previous fillings of the bins may contaminate a whole new lot of 
 oysters. The bins should be washed out thoroughly from accumu- 
 lations of dirt and shells between each filling. It is much better 
 to empty a bin of one lot of oysters before a new lot is added, 
 thus preventing the holding over of some oysters from one time 
 to another. 
 
 Benches. The opening-benches should be kept clean. Fre- 
 quent flushing and scrubbing will be necessary, preferably with 
 boiling water, at the places where the openers stand. Pieces of 
 oyster meat remaining on the benches, and oyster liquor which has 
 soaked into the wood, decay and contaminate new oysters which 
 may come in contact with them. Openers should not be allowed 
 to open oysters directly upon the benches, but always into proper 
 containers. 
 
 Utensils. All pans, measures, colanders, buckets, cans, etc., 
 used for holding opened oysters should be of such construction 
 and material that they may be properly cleaned. The simpler the 
 construction, the less corners, seams and rust, the more easily 
 this may be done. They should be thoroughly washed with soap 
 and hot water, and then scalded out with boiling water or steam, 
 at least once every day. Water that is actually boiling will destroy 
 accumulations of germs. Steaming in streaming steam or steam 
 under pressure is even more effective. A steam chest or sterilizer 
 into which all utensils may be placed after washing and left in 
 
OPENING HOUSES. 97 
 
 the steam for ten or fifteen minutes is the surest method of 
 sterilization. The same care must be employed with utensils that 
 come in contact with opened oysters that the dairyman takes with 
 his milk-cans to prevent the souring of the milk. Knives used by 
 the openers must be subjected to the same treatment. 
 
 Water Supply. An abundant supply of pure water is neces- 
 sary in an oyster house. This must be available not only for 
 washing the oysters, but also for flushing the bins, benches, and 
 floor, and for washing the utensils. As much care must be exer- 
 cised in the selection of a source of supply as is used where the 
 water is to be used for drinking purposes. If a well is the source 
 of supply it must be properly located so that it is free from all 
 possibility of sewage contamination. 
 
 If a town supply is used it also must be perfectly free from 
 suspicion. It is the intention of this Commission to make analyses 
 of the water supplies of the various oyster houses of the State, 
 and to furnish information to those interested as to the quality of 
 the water. 
 
 If a tank is used for storing the water it should be properly 
 covered to prevent dirt, dust, and animals from finding their way 
 into it. About once every month it should be drained dry and 
 scrubbed out, to free it from any accumulation of sediment. 
 
 Hot Water. An abundant supply of hot water is absolutely 
 necessary in every oyster house. This will be insisted upon by 
 this Commission before licenses are granted. The hot water 
 must be available both for washing the utensils and benches, and 
 also for washing the hands of the employees. A sufficient supply 
 cannot be obtained by heating in a vessel on a stove. It will be 
 necessary to install a hot-water supply in connection with the 
 heating plant or steam supply. 
 
 Steam. Some arrangement must be provided so that steam 
 may be had abundantly for scalding out the utensils and, if possi- 
 ble, for a steam chest or sterilizer. Every shop needs some heat- 
 ing apparatus, and the simplest method would be to combine 
 heating, steam and hot-water supply from the same boiler. 
 
 Ice. The source of the ice supply must be considered from 
 .the sanitary standpoint also. Ice may contain contaminating 
 germs. If contaminated ice comes in contact with the oysters 
 during the cooling process there is danger of the oysters becoming 
 contaminated. The Commission will also undertake to determine 
 the quality of the ice supply of the various houses. 
 
 The less time oysters are in contact with ice or iced water, the 
 better. Cooling must be effected as rapidly as possible. The 
 smaller the bulk of oysters exposed to the water or ice at one 
 time, the more rapid and efficient the cooling. If oysters are 
 rapidly and thoroughly cooled as soon as opened, and then kept 
 at a fairly low temperature, there should be practically no increase 
 in the number of germs of any sort .present. 
 
98 RHODE ISLAND REGULATIONS. 
 
 The ice box or refrigerating room in which opened oysters 
 are held should be cleaned and scrubbed at frequent intervals, so 
 that it may be clean, sweet, and free from odors. 
 
 Employees. Too much stress cannot be laid upon the neces- 
 sity of having the hands and clothing of the employees clean. 
 If the oyster beds are free from pollution and the utensils 
 properly sterilized, practically the only other important source of 
 contamination is the handling of the oysters by the openers. 
 Every facility must be provided for them to wash their hands 
 every time they come to the opening-benches to begin work. If 
 they leave the bench for any reason except to deposit the opened 
 oysters at the proper place, they should again wash their hands. 
 They should be particularly instructed to wash their hands 
 thoroughly after the use of the closet. An abundant supply of 
 hot and cold water, soap, and clean towels should be conveniently 
 located, and constant verbal directions by those in charge, or 
 printed signs, should call attention to this important point. A 
 little attention to this matter would soon make clean hands a habit 
 with them. They must also be instructed to wear aprons, gloves, 
 and finger cots which are clean. It would be well for the owners 
 of the shops to furnish these, so that their condition as to cleanli- 
 ness can be properly controlled. The same process of boiling or 
 sterilization used for the utensils should be followed with these 
 articles also. Jumpers and overalls or other outer clothing worn 
 by the employees should be reasonably clean. 
 
 Inquiry should be made for cases of illness among the 
 employees or their families at frequent intervals. No man should 
 be allowed in the opening-house, or to have anything to do with 
 the handling of the oysters who has recently had any contagious 
 disease, or in whose family there has been such a case. The 
 advice of the local health officers or of this Commission may be 
 had in this matter. 
 
 Toilet Facilities. Toilet facilities must be provided, but 
 they must be so located that there is no danger of pollution from 
 this source. A properly located and constructed closet on land is 
 much better than an open closet on the wharf. In either case the 
 closet must be kept clean and flies excluded from the pit. In 
 large houses, where many men are employed, some proper method 
 of sewage disposal must be installed. The Commission will 
 always be ready to advise as to what method they think best 
 adapted to any particular case. 
 
 The Commission feels that the above instructions and direc- 
 tions are not at all unreasonable, and that they may be carried out 
 without imposing any greater expense than is absolutely neces- 
 sary to insure a clean product. This added expense will be more 
 than made up by the increased market value of the product and 
 the increased consumption when the public knows that the oysters 
 are produced under sanitary regulations. 
 
NEW HAVEN AND MASSACHUSETTS LAWS. 99 
 
 The inspector of the Commission will visit the opening- 
 houses from time to time to see whether the above directions are 
 carried out; and unless the shops conform substantially to the 
 above regulations, licenses will not be issued and those that are 
 issued will be cancelled. 
 
 (A large printed card containing the main points of the above 
 is required to be placed on the wall of every Rhode Island open- 
 ing house for the attention of the employees.) 
 
 BOARD OF HEALTH, CITY OF NEW HAVEN. 
 
 HEALTH REGULATIONS DE OYSTERS. 
 
 Section 1. The floating or fattening of oysters in the polluted 
 waters of New Haven harbor or in any rivers or streams opening 
 into said harbor, and the selling or offering for sale of oysters 
 contaminated by such waters, is hereby prohibited. 
 
 Sec. 2. Every person violating this regulation, on conviction, 
 shall forfeit or pay a penalty of not more than one hundred 
 dollars. 
 
 STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 
 (Chap. 460) 
 
 AN ACT RELATIVE TO THE DISCHARGE OF WASTE MATERIALS INTO THE STREAMS 
 OF THE COMMONWEALTH. 
 
 Be it enacted, etc., as follozvs: 
 
 Section 1. If the commissioners on fisheries and game deter- 
 mine that the fisheries of any brook or stream in this common- 
 wealth may be of sufficient value to warrant the prohibition or 
 regulation of the discharge or escape of sawdust, shavings, gar- 
 bage, ashes, acids, sewage, dye stuffs, and other waste material 
 from any particular sawmill, manufacturing or mechanical plant, 
 or dwelling house, stable or other building, which may, directly 
 or indirectly, materially injure such fisheries, they may by an order 
 in writing to the owner or tenant of such sawmill, manufacturing 
 or mechanical plant, dwelling house, stable or other building, pro- 
 hibit or regulate the discharge or escape of sawdust, shavings, 
 garbage, ashes, acids, sewage, dye stuffs, and other waste material 
 therefrom into such brook or stream. Such order may be revoked 
 or modified by them at any time. Before any such order is made 
 said commissioners shall, after reasonable notice to all parties 
 in interest, give a public hearing in the county where the sawmill, 
 manufacturing or mechanical plant, dwelling house, stable or 
 other builcling to be affected by the order is located, at which 
 hearing any citizens shall have the right to be heard on the 
 questions to be determined by the commissioners. Upon peti- 
 tion of the party aggrieved by such order, filed within six months 
 after the date thereof, the superior court, sitting in equity, may, 
 after such notice as it may deem sufficient, hear all interested 
 
5 MASSACHUSETTS AND VIRGINIA LAWS. 
 
 parties and annul, alter or affirm the order. If such petition is 
 filed by the party aggrieved by said order within ten days after 
 the date thereof, said order shall not take effect until altered or 
 affirmed as aforesaid. Whoever, having so been notified, discharges 
 sawdust, shavings, garbage, ashes, acids, sewage, dye stuffs, and 
 other waste materials, or suffers or permits it to be discharged or 
 to escape from said plant under his control, into a brook or stream 
 in violation of the order of said commissioners, or of said court, 
 if an appeal is taken, shall be punished by a fine of not more than 
 twenty-live dollars for the first offence and of fifty dollars for a 
 second offence. 
 
 Sec. 2. Section eight of chapter ninety-one of the Revised 
 Laws, as amended by chapter three hundred and fifty-six of the 
 acts of the year nineteen hundred and six, is hereby repealed. 
 
 Sec. 3. This act shall take effect on the first day of January 
 
 in the year nineteen hundred and eleven. 
 
 Approved April 28, 1910. 
 
 Operative January 1, 1911. 
 
 STATE OF VIRGINIA. 
 
 DAIRY AND FOOD DIVISION. 
 
 William D. Saunders, Commissioner. 
 
 Benjamin L. Purcell, Deputy Commissioner. 
 
 Richmond, Va., January 19, 1910. 
 rules and regulations. 
 Effective on and after this date, adopted by the Dairy and 
 Food Commissioner and approved by the Commissioner and 
 Board of Agriculture and Immigration, providing for the sani- 
 tation of canneries, packing houses, oyster-shucking plants, fish- 
 packing plants, or store or market room or stall used in the 
 packing, storage, sale or distribution of oysters, crabs, fish, 
 lobsters, clams, etc. : 
 
 (1) Every building, room, shed, wharf or store used as a 
 cannery, packing house, oyster-shucking plant, fish-packing plant 
 or store or market, room or stall, selling or exposing for sale or 
 for distribution or storage of oysters, crabs, fish, lobsters, clams, 
 etc., shall be properly lighted, drained, plumbed and ventilated, 
 and conducted with due regard for the purity and wholesomeness 
 of the food therein produced, and with strict regard to the 
 influence of such conditions upon the health of the operatives, 
 employees, clerks, or other persons therein employed. * 
 
 (2) The floors, side walls, ceilings, furniture, receptacles, 
 implements, and machinery of every establishment where oysters, 
 crabs, fish, lobsters, clams, etc., are packed, stored, sold, or dis- 
 tributed, shall at all times be kept in a clean, healthful, and sani- 
 tary condition. 
 
VIRGINIA OYSTER REGULATIONS. IOI 
 
 (3) The above food in the process of preparation, packing, 
 storing, sale, or distribution must be securely protected from flies, 
 dust, dirt, and as far as may be necessary, from all other foreign 
 or injurious contamination. 
 
 (4) All refuse, dirt, and the waste products subject to 
 decomposition and fermentation incident to the preparation, pack- 
 ing, storing, selling and distributing of food must be removed 
 from the premises daily. 
 
 (5) All trucks, trays, boxes, baskets, buckets, and other 
 receptacles, chutes, platforms, racks, tables, shelves, and all knives, 
 saws, cleavers and other utensils and machinery used in moving, 
 handling, cutting, chopping, mixing, canning, and all other process, 
 must be thoroughly cleaned daily by sterilization with either boil- 
 ing water or live steam. 
 
 (6) The clothing of operatives, employees, clerks, or other 
 persons must be as clean as practicable. 
 
 (7) The doors, windows and other openings of every can- 
 nery, oyster and fish-distributing establishment during the fly 
 season shall be fitted with self-closing screen doors and wire 
 window screens of not coarser than 14-mesh wire gauze. 
 
 (8) The sleeping place or places for persons employed in 
 such establishments shall be separate and apart from the room in 
 which food products are manufactured, packed, distributed, or 
 stored. 
 
 (9) No employer shall knowingly permit, require, or suffer 
 any person to work in a cannery, packing house, oyster-shuck- 
 ing plant, or store where oysters, crabs, fish, lobsters, clams, etc., 
 are packed, shucked, stored, distributed, or kept for sale, who is 
 afflicted with any contagious or infectious disease, or with any 
 skin disease. 
 
 (10) Every cannery, packing house, oyster-shucking plant, 
 etc., shall be provided with a convenient wash room and toilet 
 of sanitary construction, but such toilet shall be entirely separate 
 and apart from any room used for the manufacture or storage of 
 food products. 
 
 (11) It is unlawful to take oysters or other shell-fish from 
 insanitary or polluted beds to ship or to sell, or offer for sale, for 
 human consumption. 
 
 (12) It is unlawful to ship or to sell or offer for sale 
 oysters or other shell-fish which have become polluted because 
 of packing under insanitary conditions, or being placed in unclean 
 receptacles. In order to prevent pollution during the packing or 
 shipment of oysters, it is necessary to give proper attention to 
 the sanitary condition of the establishment in which they are 
 packed and to use only receptacles which have been thoroughly 
 sterilized. 
 
 (13) It is unlawful to ship or to sell or offer for sale 
 oysters or other shell-fish which have been subjected to "floating" 
 
J VIRGINIA OYSTER REGULATIONS. 
 
 or "drinking" in brackish water, or water containing less salt 
 than that in which they are grown. There can be no objection to 
 "drinking" shell-fish in unpolluted water. Attention is called, 
 however, to the dangers resulting from "drinking" shell-fish near 
 polluted fresh water streams and near other sources of pollution. 
 
 (14) It is unlawful to ship or sell, or to offer for sale 
 shucked oysters to which water has been added, either directly 
 or in the form of melted ice. 
 
 (15) The packing of shell-fish with ice in contact is 
 inhibited. 
 
 (16) Only unpolluted cold or iced water should be employed 
 in washing shucked shell-fish, and the washing, -including chilling, 
 should not continue longer than the minimum time necessary for 
 cleaning and chilling. 
 
 (17) The shipment of oysters in contact with ice is inhibited. 
 The floating of oysters in harbor waters or in polluted waters is 
 inhibited. 
 
 (18) The taking of oysters for food purposes from polluted 
 waters is inhibited. 
 
 (19) Suitable containers used for keeping, packing, or 
 transporting oysters, fish, crabs, clams, etc., should contain on 
 their surfaces in contact with the food product no lead, antimony, 
 arsenic, zinc, or copper, or any compounds thereof, or any other 
 poisonous or injurious substances. 
 
 If the containers are made of tin plates, they should be out- 
 side soldered and the tin plate in no place should contain less 
 than 113 milligrams of tin on a piece five (5) centimeters square 
 or one and eight-tenths (1.8) grains on a piece two (2) inches 
 square. The inner coating should be free from blisters, pin 
 holes, or cracks. If the tin plate is lacquered, the lacquer must 
 completely cover the tin service within the container, and must 
 yield to the contents of the container no lead, antimony, arsenic, 
 zinc, or copper, or any compounds thereof, or any other poisonous 
 or injurious substances. 
 
 It is recommended that retail dealers or distributors of 
 oysters supply themselves with suitable smooth surface ware, 
 free from inside seams and with oval bottoms and double tops, 
 preferably granite or porcelain ware to be used as dispensing- 
 vessels. These vessels should be so arranged that they could be 
 kept surrounded with ice or water for refrigeration purposes. 
 
 (20) In view of the fact that the shipping season has begun 
 and shippers will require several months to provide themselves 
 with suitable containers for the shipment of shell-fish out of 
 contact with ice, no prosecutions will be recommended prior to 
 May 1, 1910, for the shipment or sale of oysters or other shell- 
 fish because of the addition of water caused solely by shipment 
 in contact with ice. 
 
FORMS FOR FRANCHISE GRANTS. 103 
 
 No.. 
 APPLICATION 
 
 OF 
 
 OF 
 
 .acres, in the Town of 
 
 Filed the day of. 
 
 19 , o'clock, noon. 
 
 TO THE 
 
 SHELL FISH COMMISSIONERS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 STATE OF CONNECTICUT 
 
 The Application of a resident 
 
 of the Town of in the County of 
 
 and State of Connecticut respectfully shows : that he has resided 
 in said State more than one year next preceding the date of this 
 application ; that the grounds hereinafter described are undesig- 
 nated grounds and are not now, and for ten years last past have 
 not been, natural clam or oyster beds ; 'and have not been desig- 
 nated according to the provisions of the act hereinafter described 
 as natural oyster, clam or mussel beds ; that he wishes and intends 
 to use said grounds for planting and cultivating shell fish. He 
 therefore respectfully requests that said Commissioners, pursuant 
 to an act entitled "An Act establishing a State Commission for 
 the Designation of Oyster Grounds," passed by the General 
 Assembly of Connecticut at its January Session, 1881, will grant to 
 him, in the name and behalf of the State of Connecticut, a per- 
 petual franchise for planting and cultivating shell fish in 
 acres of ground, located under the waters of Long Island Sound, 
 between the meridian boundary lines of the town of , 
 
 in the State aforesaid, and south of the coast line established by 
 the first section of the act aforesaid, which grounds are more 
 particularly bounded and described, as follows, to wit : 
 
 Dated at , Connecticut, this 
 
 day of A. D. 19 
 
 Applicant. 
 
 GRANT OF FRANCHISE. 
 
 FROM 
 
 THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT. 
 
 Received for Record 
 at h m M., and recorded in 
 
 vol. on page of Commissioners Records, 
 by 
 
 Clerk. 
 
104 FORMS FOR FRANCHISE GRANTS. 
 
 resident of the State of Connecticut, pursuant to An Act entitled 
 an Act establishing a State Commission for the designation of 
 oyster beds, passed by the General Assembly at its January session, 
 A.D. 1881, ha made application to the Commissioners of shell fish- 
 eries of the State of Connecticut for a grant of a perpetual fran- 
 chise for planting and cultivating shell fish in the grounds herein- 
 after bounded and described, wherein he represent that he ha 
 resided in the State of Connecticut more than one year next pre- 
 ceding the date of said application; that the said grounds are 
 undesignated grounds and are not now, and for ten years last 
 passed have not been, natural clam or oyster beds, and have not 
 been designated according to the provisions of the said act as 
 natural oyster, clam or mussel beds; that he wish and intend 
 to use said grounds for planting and cultivating shell fish, which 
 application is dated the day of A. D. 1 ; and was 
 
 filed with the clerk of said Commissioners on the 
 day of A. D. 1 , as appears by the note placed 
 
 thereon by said clerk; and whereas, a written notice, stating the 
 name and residence of said applicant , the date of filing the said 
 application, the location, area and description of the grounds 
 applied for, having been posted by said clerk for twenty days in 
 the office of the town clerk of the town of within 
 
 the meridian boundary lines of which said grounds are located, 
 for all persons to file objections, if any they have, to the granting 
 of the grounds applied for: 
 
 AND WHEREAS, no valid objections having been made 
 thereto, and the area of said grounds not being, in the opinion of 
 the Commissioners, of unreasonable extent, the said grounds 
 having been surveyed, located and delineated on the map of the 
 Commissioners; the actual costs of surveying and mapping said 
 grounds, amounting to dollars, and 
 
 the price of said grounds at one dollar per acre, amounting to 
 
 dollars, having been paid by said 
 applicant to the Commissioners for the benefit of the State of 
 Connecticut. Now, therefore 
 
 Know all men by these presents, THAT The State of Con- 
 necticut, acting by and through the Commissioners on shell 
 fisheries, in consideration of the premises and especially for the 
 sum last above mentioned, duly received from said applicant , 
 hath given and granted and by these presents doth give and grant 
 unto the said applicant and to i legal representatives 
 
 forever a perpetual franchise for the planting and cultivation of 
 shell fish in the 
 
 acres of ground applied for, bounded and described as follows, 
 that is to say: 
 
 To have and to hold the same unto the said grantee and 
 
 legal representatives, to the only use and behoof of the said 
 
 grantee and legal representatives forever : 
 
 PROVIDED always, that said grounds have not heretofore 
 been designated and are not now, and for ten years last passed, 
 have not been natural ciam or oyster beds, and have not been 
 designated according to the provisions of the said act as natural 
 oyster, clam, or mussel beds, and provided further that this grant 
 shall not interfere with any established right of fishing and that 
 said grantee shall at once cause the said grounds to be plainly 
 marked by stakes, buoys, ranges or monuments, which stakes, 
 buoys, ranges or monuments shall be continued by the said 
 
FORMS FOR FRANCHISE GRANTS. 105 
 
 grantee and legal representatives ; and provided further, 
 
 that this grantee or holder of said grounds shall actually use 
 and occupy the same for the purposes named in good faith within 
 five years from the date hereof, and for no other purpose; and 
 provided further, that this grant is accepted by said grantee sub- 
 ject to all the provisions of the act aforesaid. 
 
 In Witness Whereof, the Commissioners of shell fisheries, in 
 behalf of the State of Connecticut, by virtue of the authority 
 vested in them by said act, have hereto set their hands and seals 
 this 
 
 Signed, Sealed and Delivered in Presence of 
 
 State of Connecticut, ) > T „ a -n, 
 
 County of New Haven, \ ss " New Haven ' AD - 
 
 Personally appeared, 
 Commissioners of Shell Fisheries of Connecticut, signers and 
 sealers of the foregoing instrument and severally acknowledged 
 the same to be their free act and deed in behalf of the State of 
 Connecticut and in their own behalf, before me. 
 
REPORT TO THE 
 
 STATE BOARD OF HEALTH 
 
 ON THE 
 
 SANITARY INVESTIGATION 
 
 OF 
 
 OYSTER GROUNDS 
 
 IN THE 
 
 NEW HAVEN HARBOR 
 
 BY 
 
 JAMES A. NEWLANDS and GEORGE C. HAM 
 
 1910 
 
SANITARY INVESTIGATION OF OYSTER GROUNDS 
 IN THE NEW HAVEN HARBOR. 
 
 Connecticut State Board of Health, Hartford, Conn.: 
 
 Gentlemen : — The following is a report on the sanitary- 
 investigation of the oyster grounds in the New Haven Harbor 
 ordered by your honorable body at the request of the Board of 
 Equalization and Oyster Investigation Commission. 
 
 It was the desire of this Commission that a general investi- 
 gation be made into the sanitary condition of the oyster grounds 
 along the Connecticut coast. The importance of such an 
 investigation was understood, but as there were no funds avail- 
 able for this work a committee was appointed by the Board to 
 determine what might .be done. At a meeting of this committee, 
 held in June, it was decided that the investigation of watersheds 
 in the State, then in progress, should be discontinued for a short 
 time and that the writers should undertake a preliminary investi- 
 gation of conditions in the New Haven Harbor. 
 
 The investigation has been divided into the following heads : 
 i A study of the literature bearing upon the relation of 
 oysters to the dissemination of disease. 
 
 2 A general sanitary survey of the New Haven Harbor. 
 
 3 Laboratory investigation of the water and oysters in the 
 New Haven Harbor. 
 
 A STUDY OF THE LITERATURE BEARING UPON 
 
 THE RELATION OF OYSTERS TO THE 
 
 DISSEMINATION OF DISEASE. 
 
 A study of the literature reveals only a few references to 
 oysters as carriers of disease germs previous to 1880. In that 
 year Cameron, in a paper entitled "Oysters and Typhoid Fever" 
 read before the British Medical Association, suggested that out- 
 breaks of typhoid fever and cholera might be caused by eating 
 oysters. In 1893 Thorne-Thorne, in a report to the Local 
 Government Board, wrote that, in his opinion, certain cases of 
 cholera which had occurred that year at various inland towns in 
 England were due to eating contaminated oysters from beds at 
 Grimsby, where there had been a small cholera epidemic. Fol- 
 lowing the suggestions embodied in this report the English 
 
IIO SANITARY INVESTIGATION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR. 
 
 Government began a series of investigations which have made 
 many important additions to our present knowledge of the sub- 
 ject. 
 
 In this country in 1894 the well-known epidemic of typhoid 
 fever at Wesleyan University was reported by Dr. H. W. Conn 
 in the 17th Annual Report of this Board and as the epidemic was 
 shown to have been caused by oysters from the New Haven Har- 
 bor a brief summary of the report may be of interest. The facts 
 briefly are as follows: On October 12, 1894, banquets were 
 given by a number of the college fraternities in connection with 
 initiation ceremonies. Within less than a month twenty-five 
 cases of illness were reported among students belonging to three 
 of the fraternities, and of these twenty-three cases were diag- 
 nosed as typhoid fever. No evidence could be found to show 
 that the water, milk, ice, or vegetables used at the banquets had 
 been infected. The water was obtained from the city supply 
 and the other articles of food were purchased from dealers who 
 had also supplied many of the townspeople and some of the other 
 fraternities where no illness had been reported. Suspicion was 
 turned to raw oysters, which were served at the three fraternities 
 where the typhoid cases had appeared, and it was found that they 
 had been obtained from a local dealer. This dealer had also sup- 
 plied one other fraternity, but the oysters in this case were 
 cooked and no ill effects were reported. Inquiry regarding two 
 other cases of typhoid fever which occurred in the town at this 
 time developed the fact that both patients had eaten raw oysters 
 purchased from the above-mentioned dealer. Upon further 
 investigation it was found that this shipment of oysters had been 
 taken from grounds in Long Island Sound and later floated in 
 the Quinnipiac River a short distance from a private sewer 
 draining a house where there were then two cases of typhoid 
 fever. It was also found that a portion of the same lot of 
 oysters had been shipped to Amherst, Mass., where they were 
 served at a fraternity banquet held on the same evening as the 
 Wesleyan banquets, and six cases of typhoid fever developed 
 among those who ate oysters. The chain of evidence connecting 
 this epidemic with the use of contaminated oysters appears to be 
 complete. 
 
 Again in 1902 the famous oyster epidemics at Winchester 
 and Southampton, England, were proven beyond reasonable 
 
DISSEMINATION OF DISEASE. Ill 
 
 doubt to have been caused by contaminated oysters taken from 
 grounds at Ems worth. Here again we have to deal with ban- 
 quets given in different cities where the only common source of 
 infection appears to have been contaminated oysters. Of the 
 two hundred and sixty-seven guests at these banquets one hun- 
 dred and eighteen were attacked with intestinal disorders and 
 twenty-one cases of typhoid fever developed, five of which were 
 fatal. 
 
 Although, as has been brought out by Mr. H. C. Rowe, in a 
 paper on "The Wholesomeness of Oysters as Food," a great many 
 sensational attacks have been made against oysters as carriers of 
 disease germs which have been based on little or no evidence, 
 yet the above-mentioned investigations and others, among which 
 might be mentioned those by Thresh 1902, Marvel 1902, and 
 Soper 1905, have brought out sufficient trustworthy evidence to 
 show that contaminated oysters must be considered as a real 
 factor in the dissemination of typhoid fever and other water- 
 borne diseases. An estimate of the extent to which such illness 
 is due to oysters would be impossible at the present time. The 
 Royal Sewage Commission after an extensive investigation on 
 this subject came to the following conclusion: "After carefully 
 considering the whole of the evidence on this point, we are satis- 
 fied that a considerable number of cases of enteric fever and 
 other illness are caused by the consumption of shell-fish which 
 have been exposed to sewage contamination ; but in the present 
 state of knowledge, we do not think it possible to make an 
 accurate numerical statement. 
 
 "Moreover an examination of the figures which have been 
 placed before us as regards those towns in which the subject has 
 been most carefully studied shows that there may be occasional 
 errors. Indeed the witnesses themselves recognized that abso- 
 lutely accurate figures were not obtainable. 
 
 "We are far from denying that isolated cases may have been 
 due to contaminated shell-fish, but we must remember that the 
 possibility of some of them being due to other causes cannot be 
 altogether excluded." 
 
 In the above-mentioned cases, where oysters have been 
 proven or reasonably suspected of being the cause of disease, it 
 has been found that the oysters in question had been floated or 
 grown in heavily polluted water where direct contact with spe- 
 
112 SANITARY INVESTIGATION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR. 
 
 cific infection could be proven or readily assumed. The Wes- 
 leyan epidemic is a case in point. Oysters had undoubtedly been 
 floated in the contaminated waters at Fair Haven for a number 
 of years previous to 1894 without any noticeable effect on the 
 health of persons eating them, but specific infection of the water 
 from two patients in a house nearby was followed by a serious 
 epidemic. 
 
 The character of the contamination and the directness with 
 which it is carried to the oyster are all important factors in the 
 part played by the oyster in the transmission of disease. Quot- 
 ing Houston, recorded in the Fourth Report of the Royal Sewage 
 Commission, "A pollution trivial in amount but specific in char- 
 acter is much more dangerous than contamination gross in 
 amount with nonspecific in nature. It is also probable that a 
 pollution trivial in amount but specific in character and of recent 
 sort, is more dangerous than a pollution gross in amount, specific 
 in character, but of remote kind." 
 
 METHODS OF DETERMINING THE DANGER OF A 
 GIVEN POLLUTION. 
 
 No method of direct estimation of the disease value of a 
 given pollution has yet been devised and although the advent of 
 the science of bacteriology has helped much in the solution of 
 public health problems, it has failed, thus far, to give investi- 
 gators a method for determining the presence or absence of 
 disease germs in contaminated water or oysters except under 
 rare conditions. The New York Department of Health, 1908, in 
 a report on the "Sanitary Inspection of Shell-Fish Grounds in 
 New York," reaches the conclusion that a standard based upon the 
 presence or absence of disease-producing conditions in shell-fish 
 beds and their contents is impossible at this time, and continue: 
 "We are forced therefore, to rely for such action as may be 
 advisable upon the basis of the estimation of the amount and 
 distribution of the sewage pollution of a general character in 
 relation to shell-fish beds and their contents, and to oyster drink- 
 ing places. Nevertheless, making such a basis for action is 
 fraught with no little danger, for the reason that the basis is an 
 artificial one ; and on the one hand, it is entirely possible that 
 approval may be given under it to beds, drinking places and 
 
METHOD OF DETERMINING POLLUTION. 113 
 
 indirectly to oysters and shell-fish, which may become the means 
 of transmitting disease; and on the other hand, it is more than 
 likely that beds, etc., may be condemned which are nOt in reality 
 a menace to health and will not likely become so. In fact, jus- 
 tice to the oyster industry on the one hand, and to the public 
 health on the other, demands that action on this basis shall not be 
 taken except after the most careful and exhaustive investigations 
 of an epidemiological, sanitary engineering, and biological 
 character." 
 
 In the Fourth Report of the Royal Sewage Commission pre- 
 viously quoted we find the following statement: "The methods 
 at present available to the bacteriologist do not permit of his 
 detecting, except possibly in rare cases, the typhoid fever micro- 
 organism either in sewage largely diluted with sea water or in 
 shell-fish ; neither do they enable him to measure, in any exact 
 manner, whether the micro-organisms which he takes as his 
 index of danger are of recent or remote intestinal origin. More- 
 over, there is no constant ratio between the numbers of the 
 organism taken as an index and the numbers of the disease-pro- 
 ducing organism in the typhoid intestine, in the raw sewage or 
 in the mixture of sewage and estuary water. Mere numbers of 
 B. Coli or any other particular micro-organism of sewage can- 
 not, therefore, be said to have anything approaching an exact 
 value as an indicator of the danger of disease, and we consider 
 that before any working bacteriological standard can be applied 
 further knowledge is necessary." 
 
 Definite evidence of sewage contamination, however, must be 
 considered as "potential infection," and in order to form some 
 basis for passing upon the quality of oysters which will be fair 
 alike to the oyster industry and to the public health, certain 
 investigators have classified their results to show different 
 degrees of pollution, the final opinion regarding evidence of 
 pollution being based upon a study of these results in connection 
 with a careful sanitary survey of the grounds in question. In 
 the report of the New York Department of Health previously 
 quoted, the work of Dr. A. C. Houston, the Mass. State Board 
 of Health, Dr. C. A. Fuller, and Dr. Geo. A. Soper have been 
 compared, and although there are some differences in the 
 methods of reporting results which make accurate comparison 
 difficult, the differences in the standards suggested are not so 
 
114 SANITARY INVESTIGATION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR. 
 
 great as might be expected. Roughly, it may be said that the 
 Mass. State Board and Fuller would consider positive 
 tests for B. Coli in one cubic centimeter of the shell liquor as 
 definite evidence of pollution, while Houston and Soper would 
 require positive tests in one-tenth of a cubic centimeter for 
 definite evidence. 
 
 After a large amount of investigation the Bureau of Chem- 
 istry of the U. S. Department of Agriculture has decided to con- 
 demn oysters sold in interstate commerce which show more than 
 two samples out of five giving positive tests for B. Coli types of 
 organisms in one-tenth of a cuBic centimeter of the shell liquor. 
 When oysters have been condemned on this standard, however, 
 the examinations have been supplemented with an inspection of 
 the beds from which the oysters were obtained, and a bacterio- 
 logical examination of the water bathing the oysters from these 
 localities. 
 
 At the annual meeting of the American Public Health 
 Association held in September of this year, the Committee on 
 "Standard Methods of Sanitary Shell-Fish Examination" gave 
 considerable time to a discussion of bacteriological standards, but 
 no definite action was taken. 
 
 The Rhode Island Shell-Fish Commission is now using the 
 government ruling in passing upon the oyster grounds of that 
 state, i.e. all oysters are condemned in which three out of five 
 show the presence of colon bacilli in .1 of a cubic centimeter of 
 shell water. Sanitary certificates are*issued for all oysters that 
 pass this standard. Professor Gorham, under whose direction 
 the bacteriological investigations of the Commission are being 
 carried on, also holds for special study those grounds where the 
 sanitary survey shows that the conditions are dangerous although 
 the oysters may be all right, and grounds where the results of 
 analysis are bad although the sanitary conditions appear to be 
 good. For such grounds a conditional certificate is issued which 
 states that the oysters covered by such a conditional certificate 
 are in a questionable area and require further study before being 
 passed upon. 
 
 Too great emphasis cannot be placed upon the fact that the 
 adoption of a bacteriological standard which will be fair alike to 
 the oyster industry and to the public health must be determined 
 in the light of data gathered from allied lines of investigation. 
 
METHOD OF DETERMINING POLLUTION. 115 
 
 To quote from the admirable paper by George W. Fuller on 
 "Shell-Fish and Typhoid Fever," "Epidemiology, bacteriology, 
 sanitary chemistry, and hydraulic engineering are called to assist 
 in the solution of this problem, in conjunction with those physi- 
 cal data usually called a "sanitary survey." * * * To con- 
 sider one aspect of the case will not do, as such evidence might 
 be misleading to such a degree as to do far more harm than good. 
 In the future the engineer will especially be obliged to consider 
 this question in further detail, and to cooperate in seeing to it 
 that various sanitary surveys and samples for analysis have due 
 regard for the physical side of the case, as, for example, the cur- 
 rents, tides, winds, relative volumes of sewage and of fresh and 
 salt water (tidal prisms), velocity, dilution, effect of sedimenta- 
 tion and scouring, temperature, relative densities of water, strati- 
 fication, and especially the period of time elapsing during the 
 passage of sewage from the outfalls to the shell-fish beds and 
 "drinking grounds." 
 
 The position taken by the Rhode Island Commission in 
 adopting the Government ruling appears to us to be the logical 
 one at the present time. It has fche advantage of allowing the 
 sale of oysters in interstate commerce from certified grounds, 
 will protect the public health and will help bring back the confi- 
 dence of the public in the use of this wholesome food, while those 
 grounds lying within the condemned or questionable areas may 
 be returned to use as rapidly as future investigations warrant 
 such a change. 
 
 SANITARY SURVEY OF THE NEW HAVEN 
 HARBOR. 
 
 The New Haven Harbor north of the breakwaters covers an 
 area of n.68 sq. miles. The inner harbor, i.e. that portion of 
 the harbor north of a line between the "Jetty" and Fort Hale, 
 has an area of 3.32 sq. miles. This portion of the harbor is quite 
 shallow, having an average depth of about five and a half feet 
 and a capacity of about 523,000,000 cu. ft. at low tide and 
 1,080,000,000 cu. ft. at high tide or a little over twice the low 
 tide capacity. 
 
 It was apparent that the incoming tide, entering the outer 
 harbor by the openings between the breakwaters and between 
 breakwaters and shore, would flow strongly up the main channel 
 
Il6 SANITARY INVESTIGATION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR. 
 
 and gradually spread to the shores. Also during the latter part 
 of the flood tide some water would flow directly from the outer 
 to the inner harbor over the dike, which is then submerged. The 
 flow of the outgoing tide would appear to be practically the 
 reverse of the incoming. 
 
 In order to determine whether there was any important 
 variation from the apparent flow or currents which would par- 
 ticularly affect the flow from the sewer outlets to the oyster 
 grounds, a number of float experiments were made. 
 
 Both ball and spar floats were used. The ball floats con- 
 sisted of a six-inch, coppered, tin ball carrying a small flag on a 
 staff set in the top and a tin vane suspended from a ring in the 
 bottom by a fish line or wire to the required depth. The vanes 
 were twenty-inch by ten-inch tin sheets set at right angles and 
 held thus by four quarter-round wood mouldings. The mould- 
 ings projected about two inches below the vanes and were held 
 together by being screwed into a heavy iron nut. Above the 
 vanes the mouldings projected about six inches and were 
 fastened by a wire run through a screw-eye in each piece. The 
 four mouldings held the vanes firmly and the buoyancy of the 
 wood above and the weight of the nut below tended to keep the 
 vanes in a horizontal position. The bottom of the ball was 
 weighted sufficiently to balance the weight of the flag before the 
 vanes were attached. The weight of the vanes when submerged 
 gave a pull on the line attached to the ball of about two pounds, 
 which caused the ball to float nearly submerged, thus decreasing 
 the effect of the wind. 
 
 This form of float was easily assembled and taken down, 
 and as the depth of the vane could be readily altered by simply 
 lengthening or shortening the lines, they were found very satis- 
 factory. 
 
 The spar floats used were made of a wood spar, two inches 
 in diameter and three and a half feet long. One end was split 
 into quarters by two saw cuts ten inches deep and the two ten- 
 inch by twenty-inch tin vanes were slipped into these cuts and 
 fastened by staples. The spars floated about nine inches out of 
 water and were painted different colors for easy identification. 
 They also carried small flags. 
 
 The floats were started either singly or in groups of two to 
 four. They were followed in a launch and their location taken 
 about every hour, by cross ranges or with an angle mirror. 
 
SANITARY SURVEY. II 7 
 
 Thirty-three floats were started from seven different points 
 during the investigation and were followed from two to seven 
 hours. Many ran aground in the inner harbor, particularly 
 those whose vanes were set over three feet deep. The more 
 interesting results are shown on the accompanying plot No. I. 
 
 In general the results of these float experiments indicate: ist, 
 That the flow from the Boulevard sewer in the early part of the 
 ebb tide is southeasterly and is divided by the Shag Bank, part 
 going down the main channel and part following the west side 
 of the bank. Later, when the tide has fallen below the level of 
 the dike and bar, the whole flow is down the channel to a point 
 below Fort Hale whence most of the floats drifted easterly into 
 Morris Cove. 
 
 2d. Floats set at the Meadow St. sewer outfall traveled very 
 slowly, some not reaching the main channel in four hours on the 
 ebb tide. 
 
 3d. Floats from Tomlinsons Bridge followed the general 
 course of the channel. 
 
 4th. The maximum velocity found in the channel was about 
 one mile per hour and the indications are that the distance 
 through which the sewage travels from the outfalls on one out- 
 going tide does not exceed three miles and is usually less except 
 for that portion which enters the main channel about mid tide. 
 
 The movement of the tides has little scouring action in the 
 inner harbor except over the Shag Bank, where the current is 
 quite rapid for a short period during each tide and the sand bar 
 is kept comparatively free from organic deposits. 
 
 The West, Mill, and Quinnipiac rivers entering the inner 
 harbor drain an area of 222 sq. miles, but these streams do not 
 increase the flushing action of the tides to any great extent as 
 the average daily run-off for the total drainage area is only 
 about 31,000,000 cu. ft., or about 6 per cent, of the capacity of 
 the inner harbor at low tide. 
 
 The Quinnipiac River or its tributaries receives raw sewage 
 from outfalls at Wallingford and Southington, but at Bristol and 
 Meriden the sewage is treated on sand filters before it is dis- 
 charged into the stream. The New Haven sewerage system 
 serving approximately 100,000 people, or about half the popula- 
 tion on the harbor drainage area, discharges from seven outfalls 
 along the west shores of the inner harbor and the Quinnipiac 
 
Il8 SANITARY INVESTIGATION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR. J 
 
 River. There are also numerous private sewers or drains along 
 the shores. 
 
 The effect of this method of sewage disposal on the oyster 
 grounds in the inner harbor is apparent. Float experiments 
 confirmed by laboratory results show that at certain stages of the 
 tide sewage from the Boulevard sewer passes directly over the 
 "Shag Bank," on which are located the most important oyster 
 grounds in the inner harbor, and the time required for the 
 sewage to travel from the outfall to the "Shag Bank" under these 
 conditions is less than an hour. Certain grounds just north of 
 the "Shag Bank" and within a few hundred feet of the Boule- 
 vard sewer outfall are still in use and it may be said literally that 
 the oysters here are bathed in dilute sewage. 
 
 The west side of the harbor is in a very unsanitary condi- 
 tion. The sewers generally discharge above the low water level, 
 and at low tide, during the summer months, foul odors due to 
 the decomposition of the sewage sludge which settles on the 
 bottom of the harbor about the outfalls can be noticed for a 
 considerable distance from the shore. This is especially true of 
 the Meadow St. outfall, where the sewage runs over a sludge- 
 covered area laid bare at low tide. 
 
 Floating garbage of all kinds, boxes and barrels, and masses 
 of feces can be seen almost any day on the surface of the harbor 
 waters. During this investigation one of the writers saw five 
 boys bathing off an oyster-house dock a short distance north of 
 the Ferry St. Bridge. The boys were formed in a circle, in the 
 center of which was a floating mass of feces several inches in 
 diameter. It requires little argument to convince the most 
 skeptical that bathing under such conditions is unhealthful. 
 
 The outer harbor, i.e. that portion of the harbor south of 
 the "Jetty," receives a small amount of drainage from private 
 drains at and east of Savin Rock and also along the shores of 
 Morris Cove and Lighthouse Point, but as will be shown by the 
 laboratory results, the most serious contamination comes from 
 the pollution in the inner harbor, which is rapidly encroaching 
 upon the safety of the grounds beyond the breakwaters. 
 
 LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS. 
 
 Through the courtesy of Jeremiah Smith & Sons, oyster 
 dealers, a room in one of their buildings at City Point, New 
 
LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS. 119 
 
 Haven, was placed at our disposal, where a laboratory was 
 equipped for the examination of water and oysters. The routine 
 work began on June 29 and was brought to a close on Sep- 
 tember 30. A total of nine hundred and forty-five samples 
 was examined, consisting of six hundred and sixty-eight water 
 samples and two hundred and seventy-seven oysters. 
 
 The laboratory work was in charge of Mr. Wm. F. Wells 
 during July and August and Mr. E. A. Robinson during Sep- 
 tember, to both of whom we are indebted for the careful manner 
 in which this work was completed. We are also indebted to the 
 New Haven oystermen who so willingly cooperated with us in 
 the work. 
 
 During the early part of the investigation water samples 
 were collected from forty-seven stations indicated on the accom- 
 panying maps. In the inner harbor samples were taken at one 
 depth, usually about three feet below the surface. In the outer 
 harbor, where the water is deeper, samples were usually taken 
 at two depths, i.e. about three and fifteen feet below the surface. 
 The samples were collected in vacuum tubes now commonly used 
 for this work, lowered in a lead tube to the desired depth and 
 broken open. 
 
 The numbers of bacteria in the water were determined on 
 standard gelatin and agar at 20 C. and 2>7° C., respectively. 
 Jackson's Bile medium was used as a presumptive test for B. Coli 
 in both water and oyster work. Confirmatory tests were not 
 made as the bile medium results have been shown to be a fair 
 index of the B. Coli content and are sufficiently accurate for pre- 
 liminary work of this nature. Samples of the shell liquor were 
 obtained by drilling through a sterilized portion of the shell near 
 the hinge with a sterile drill. The amount of oxygen dissolved 
 in the water of the inner harbor was determined at various sta- 
 tions and in this work the Winkler method was used. 
 
 Data regarding air currents, percentage of land water in the 
 harbor water, stage of tide when samples were taken, etc., have 
 been tabulated and placed on file in the office of the Board, as 
 they would require too much space to be included in this report. 
 The percentage of land water to sea water was determined by 
 means of a salinometer devised by the New York Sewerage Com- 
 mission and the results calculated from a table gotten up by that 
 Commission. 
 
120 SANITARY INVESTIGATION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR. 
 
 INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS. 
 
 It is not to be expected that in a preliminary investigation 
 covering a period of only three months enough data could 
 be obtained to form any definite basis for deciding within narrow 
 limits whether a given oyster ground is safe or dangerous. 
 Enough data have been obtained, however, to show that all the 
 grounds in the inner harbor and some of those in the outer har- 
 bor are very badly polluted and could not be passed by any 
 reasonable standard for the cultivation of market oysters. If 
 conditions here are representative of those -to be found at other 
 places along the Connecticut coast, it would seem that further 
 investigation along these lines is of vital importance both for 
 the benefit of an important industry and for the protection of the 
 public health. 
 
 For reasons previously stated we have based our classifica- 
 tion of unsanitary grounds on the government ruling. Grounds 
 from which the oysters show a B. Coli content greater than the 
 limit of the government regulation, but not positive in dilutions 
 greater than o.i of a cubic centimeter, are considered as question- 
 able areas to be held for more careful study. A map showing the 
 oyster grounds thus classified has been submitted to the State 
 Board of Health. 
 
 In reporting the B. Coli results recorded in Table No. i 
 estimates of the B. Coli content per cubic centimeter of water or 
 shell liquor were obtained from averages of all the samples 
 examined. The "Committee of the American Public Health 
 Association on Standard Methods of Shell-Fish Examination" has 
 under consideration a numerical system for recording bacterio- 
 logical results, but the system had not been fully decided upon 
 at the time of writing this report. A common system of record- 
 ing results is greatly needed, as the diverse methods now in use 
 make a comparison of the work of different investigators difficult 
 and in some cases impossible. 
 
 On the basis of the method used in recording our results 
 the government regulation would condemn grounds when the 
 oysters showed a greater B. Coli content than 4.6 per cubic centi- 
 meter of the shell water. Grounds from which oysters are taken 
 which show average B. Coli counts between 4.6 and 10. per cubic 
 centimeter are held for a more careful investigation. 
 
TABLE OF RESULTS. 
 
 
 
 WATER. 
 
 OYSTERS. 
 
 
 
 Av. Number Bacteria 
 
 Avera 
 
 ge Average 
 
 
 
 Station. 
 
 Samples 
 
 Per c. c. 
 
 Numl 
 
 >er Number 
 
 Number 
 
 Character of 
 
 
 taken. 
 
 
 B. Co 
 Perc 
 
 Ii* B. Coli* 
 c. Per c. c. 
 
 Oyster 
 
 bottom. 
 
 
 37° C. 
 
 20° C. 
 
 Samples. 
 
 Ferry St. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Bridge 
 
 12 
 
 2IO. 
 
 1260. 
 
 43 
 
 
 
 Soft. 
 
 Tomlinson 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Bridge 
 
 15 
 
 9IO. 
 
 2650. 
 
 34 
 
 
 
 " 
 
 No. i 
 
 15 
 
 5IO. 
 
 1680. 
 
 5i 
 
 
 
 " 
 
 " 2 
 
 15 
 
 375- 
 
 910. 
 
 73 
 
 
 
 " 
 
 " 3 
 
 16 
 
 255- 
 
 835- 
 
 9 
 
 72. 
 
 16. 
 
 ' * 
 
 Buoy 10 
 
 15 
 
 155- 
 
 450. 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 ' ' 
 
 No. 4 
 
 15 
 
 160. 
 
 1720. 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 * * 
 
 " 5 
 
 17 
 
 615. 
 
 1340. 
 
 74 
 
 308. 
 
 13- 
 
 " 
 
 Buoy 5 
 
 23 
 
 315- 
 
 715. 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 
 " 8 
 
 15 
 
 205. 
 
 410. 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 No. 6 
 
 16 
 
 145. 
 
 485. 
 
 8 
 
 37- 
 
 6. ' 
 
 Seaweed. 
 
 
 ' 7 
 
 21 
 
 215. 
 
 740. 
 
 29 
 
 425. 
 
 II. 
 
 Hard. 
 
 
 ' 9 B 
 
 II 
 
 220. 
 
 260. 
 
 7 
 
 64. 
 
 10. 
 
 " 
 
 
 ' 9 A 
 
 13 
 
 100. 
 
 185. 
 
 9 
 
 46. 
 
 10. 
 
 " 
 
 
 ' 9 
 
 12 
 
 195. 
 
 200. 
 
 17 
 
 37- 
 
 10. 
 
 * * 
 
 
 ' 7 A 
 
 II 
 
 120. 
 
 240. 
 
 10 
 
 255. 
 
 11. 
 
 1 ' 
 
 
 ' 8 
 
 16 
 
 180. 
 
 270. 
 
 7 
 
 370. 
 
 6. 
 
 
 
 ' io 
 
 23 
 
 300. 
 
 615. 
 
 9 
 
 100. 
 
 1. 
 
 Soft 
 
 " ii 
 
 II 
 
 405. 
 
 5io. 
 
 8 
 
 10. 
 
 4- 
 
 4 * 
 
 Buoy 6 
 
 21 
 
 815. 
 
 1690. 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 
 " 3 
 
 17 
 
 175. 
 
 59°- 
 
 6 
 
 291. 
 
 8. 
 
 Hard. 
 
 No. 12 
 
 14 
 
 620. 
 
 1190. 
 
 4 
 
 6. 
 
 5- 
 
 ' ' 
 
 " 13 
 
 7 
 
 240. 
 
 120. 
 
 10 
 
 10. 
 
 8. 
 
 " 
 
 " 14 
 
 12 
 
 285. 
 
 IIOO. 
 
 1 
 
 — 7- 
 
 8. 
 
 * i 
 
 Buoy 4 
 
 7 
 
 375. 
 
 1400. 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 No. 15 
 
 7 
 
 455- 
 
 1680. 
 
 
 45- 
 
 IS- 
 
 Hard. 
 
 " 16 
 
 14 
 
 280. 
 
 1025. 
 
 
 — 1. — 
 
 3- 
 
 Soft. 
 
 ". I7 
 
 14 
 
 300. 
 
 1260. 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 Hard. 
 
 <« 19 
 
 1 
 
 800. 
 
 300. 
 
 
 
 
 
 " 20 
 
 10 
 
 135. 
 
 860. 
 
 
 — 10. 
 
 '8. 
 
 Hard. 
 
 Buoy 2 
 
 11 
 
 375- 
 
 9°5. 
 
 
 
 
 
 No. 22 
 
 8 
 
 305. 
 
 560. 
 
 
 — 7-3 
 
 3- 
 
 Hard. 
 
 Buoy i 
 
 6 
 
 115. 
 
 995- 
 
 
 — 4- 
 
 12. 
 
 1 * 
 
 No. 18 
 
 10 
 
 255. 
 
 675. 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 
 ' 24 
 
 4 
 
 710. 
 
 1340. 
 
 
 9- 
 
 10. 
 
 Hard. 
 
 
 ' 23 
 
 6 
 
 450. 
 
 240. 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 1 * 
 
 
 ' 25 
 
 2 
 
 130. 
 
 1000. 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 
 ' 26 
 
 5 
 
 130. 
 
 465. 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 
 ' 27 
 
 10 
 
 630. 
 
 695. 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 Soft. 
 
 
 ' 28 
 
 4 
 
 415. 
 
 1400. 
 
 
 4- 
 
 3- 
 
 Mud &sand. 
 
 
 ' 29 
 
 5 
 
 37o. 
 
 1700. 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 Soft. 
 
 
 ' 30 
 
 5 
 
 185. 
 
 440. 
 
 
 — 1. — 
 
 15. 
 
 Hard. 
 
 
 ' 31 
 
 7 
 
 320. 
 
 130. 
 
 
 — 1. — 
 
 15. 
 
 * ' 
 
 
 ' 32 
 
 5 
 
 70. 
 
 1050. 
 
 
 — 3- 
 
 15- 
 
 1 * 
 
 
 ' 33 
 
 4 
 
 485. 
 
 405. 
 
 
 — 1. — 
 
 TO. 
 
 
 
 ' 34 
 
 4 
 
 535- 
 
 495- 
 
 
 — 1. 
 
 IO. 
 
 4 ' 
 
 " 35 
 
 4 
 
 120. 
 
 270. 
 
 
 — 1. 
 
 15. 
 
 Sticky. 
 
 Jackson's Lactose Bile 
 Minus sign after figure 
 
 presumptive test used. 
 
 1. indicates that the average was less than 1. 
 
122 SANITARY INVESTIGATION OF NEW HAVEN HARBOR. 
 
 A study of Map No. 2 shows that on the basis of these 
 classifications grounds shaded in red are definitely polluted. 
 The area shaded in green represents those grounds lying between 
 the limits of the two classifications, which should be given 
 further study. Oysters taken from either of these areas are 
 liable to be condemned if found on sale in interstate trade. 
 
 The area shaded blue represents those grounds which pass 
 both classifications and from which oysters may be taken for sale 
 in interstate trade. 
 
 In drawing lines between the different classes of grounds 
 the divisions had to be more or less arbitrary divisions, as we 
 were unable to get data in such a short period to show the condi- 
 tion of oyster grounds at points between the stations from which 
 the lines were drawn. A short series of examinations, however, 
 will be sufficient to supply data for changes which may be found 
 necessary. 
 
 According to these classifications approximately 1506 acres 
 of private oyster grounds show definite evidence of the presence 
 of sewage contamination and should not be used for growing 
 market oysters unless the pollution is removed. 
 
 An additional area of about 579 acres does not pass the gov- 
 ernment regulation, but is within the other classification limit. 
 
 It is probably true also that a considerable portion of the 
 natural grounds are seriously contaminated by polluted water, 
 which passes over the "jetty" dike as indicated by the three sets 
 of oyster samples examined on the last day of the investigation 
 from stations thirty-six, thirty-seven, and thirty-eight, but no 
 estimate of the polluted area could be made from these results. 
 
 GENERAL CONCLUSIONS. 
 
 While further work will be required in the outer harbor to 
 determine the effect of pollution along the shores and also the 
 condition of the natural grounds, we believe the results of this 
 investigation show in a general way the present condition of the 
 private beds. 
 
 In conclusion we would again call your attention to the very 
 dangerous condition of the oyster grounds in the inner harbor 
 and a portion of the outer harbor near the main channel. 
 Oysters showing hundreds of colon bacilli per cubic centimeter 
 
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS. 1 23 
 
 of shell liquor from grounds where physical evidence of sewage 
 contamination can be readily demonstrated are a menace to the 
 public health and a detriment to the oyster industry, and the use 
 of such grounds for raising market oysters should be prohibited 
 until they are made safe and satisfactory by the removal of such 
 pollution. 
 
 It is not within the province of this report to determine the 
 feasibility of removing sewage pollution from the oyster grounds 
 in the inner harbor, but methods can and should be adopted for 
 improving the present unsanitary condition of the inner harbor 
 and to prevent, at least, further encroachment upon the valuable 
 oyster grounds now in danger in the lower harbor and beyond 
 the breakwaters. 
 
 Respectfully submitted, 
 
 Jas. A. Newlands, 
 
 Chemist State Board of Health. 
 Geo. C. Ham, 
 
 Sanitary Inspector. 
 
 November 30, 1910. 
 
INDEX 
 
 A Page 
 
 Acknowledgments 81-82 
 
 Attorney-General's opinion on power of oyster commission 9-12 
 
 B 
 
 Blank and letter sent to private growers 12-15 
 
 Blank sent to natural growthers 46-47 
 
 Blank sent by Shell-Fish Commissioners to applicants for oyster 
 
 franchises 103-105 
 
 Board of Equalization appointed an Oyster Commission by 
 
 Legislature 3, 10 
 
 Board of Health, New Haven, on oyster regulations 99 
 
 State 55, 58 
 
 Buoying 
 
 Natural beds 33-34 
 
 Recommendations 42-44 
 
 Table, showing the cost of .' 34 
 
 Bureau of Chemistry 
 
 Decisions concerning oyster-condemnation 114 
 
 Bureau of Fisheries, Federal 77~8o 
 
 Comparative financial tables 78 
 
 Table showing statistics for year 1910 yy 
 
 D 
 
 Dangers from oyster pollution, methods of determining 112-115 
 
 Department of agriculture, United States 92-95 
 
 Dairy score card of 92-93 
 
 Diseases caused by oysters 
 
 Epidemic no-ill 
 
 Typhoid fever 1 10 
 
 Dissemination of diseases by oysters 
 
 Literature on 100-1 1 1 
 
 E 
 
 Examination, bacteriological, of oysters 50-51 
 
 Food inspection decision written after 51-52 
 
 Stiles, Dr. G. W., on sewage-pollution in connection with 51 
 
 F 
 
 Federal Bureau of Fisheries 76 
 
 Franchise taxation 16-18 
 
 Method of 18 
 
 Revaluation necessary 17-18 
 
 Variation in assessment 17 
 
 H 
 
 History of the oyster industry in Connecticut 3-9 
 
 Capitol contests 5 
 
 Cultivation 7 
 
 Early methods 7, 8 
 
 Experiments 8, 9 
 
INDEX. 125 
 
 • Page. 
 
 For residents only 4 
 
 Oyster developments 6 
 
 Privilege of transplanting 4 
 
 State Commission 5 
 
 State map work 5. 6 
 
 Two-acre law 4» 5 
 
 Vested rights 4 
 
 I 
 
 Inspection, scientific, of oysters 
 
 Views of Dr. Harvey W. Wiley on 67-68 
 
 Inspection trip made by Governor Weeks, Board, et al 9 
 
 Inspectors of mud dumping 3 I- 33 
 
 Expense of, unwarranted 32 
 
 Recommendation concerning 33 
 
 Should be appointed by State and vested with same power as 
 
 federal 32 
 
 Statute provisions relating to 32 
 
 Table showing cost of 33 
 
 Interpretation of laboratory results 
 
 Sanitary and unsanitary grounds determined by federal rulings 120 
 
 L 
 
 Laboratory investigations 
 
 By whom carried on 119 
 
 Data determined 119 
 
 Samples, how obtained 119 
 
 Law of Massachusetts concerning pollution of streams 99-100 
 
 Law of New Jersey on oyster propagation 73~74 
 
 Law of Virginia concerning oysters 100-102 
 
 Laws of Connecticut concerning oyster franchises 74~76 
 
 Recommendation concerning 74~76 
 
 Letter received by the Board from Dr. E. H. Jenkins concerning 
 
 oyster investigation 69-70 
 
 M 
 
 Maps 80 
 
 Mud dumping, inspectors of 31-33 
 
 N 
 
 National Association of Shell-Fish Commissioners 
 
 Papers read at meeting of 63 
 
 Resolution adopted by 64 
 
 Natural growthers 
 
 Blanks sent to 46-47 
 
 Restriction recommended in regard to licensing of 48 
 
 Statistics pertaining to 47-48 
 
 Natural oyster beds 
 
 Licenses, given only to State residents, cost of, etc 44 
 
 Number and names of 44 
 
 Recommendation concerning new method of taxation of 49-50 
 
 Receipts and expenses for sixteen years of 49-50 
 
 Views of B. Frank Wood on 44-46 
 
 New Haven Harbor 
 
 Classification of oyster grounds into sanitary and insanitary... 120 
 
 Maps of 122 
 
126 INDEX. 
 
 New Haven Harbor — cont. Pa £ e 
 
 Report concerning 115-118 
 
 Sanitary investigations of oyster grounds 120 
 
 Sanitary surveys of 1 15-1 18 
 
 Sewage-pollution of 112 
 
 Table giving data of 122 
 
 O 
 
 Opening houses 60-61 
 
 Employees 60-61 
 
 Lack of neatness apparent, in some 62 
 
 Oysters, how contaminated 61 
 
 Recommendation concerning 63 
 
 Opinion of Attorney-General on Commission to investigate oyster 
 
 properties 9-12 
 
 Oysters, bacteriological examination of 50-51 
 
 Oyster beds, natural 44-46 
 
 Oyster Commissioners, acting as board of relief 
 
 Applications to, etc 20, 21 
 
 Blanks sent by 19-20 
 
 Hearings of 20 
 
 Notice sent by 19 
 
 Public hearings of '. 23, 24 
 
 Oyster contamination 
 
 Conclusions relating to 123 
 
 How explained 122-123 
 
 Oyster franchises 
 
 Recommendation of Board relative to 30 
 
 Taxation of 41-44 
 
 Oyster grounds 
 
 Pollution caused by sewerage infection 58-59 
 
 Recommendation concerning 60 
 
 Should be inspected by State Board of Health 60 
 
 Oyster Growers' and Dealers' Association 
 
 Papers read at meeting of 65 
 
 Resolution adopted by 67 
 
 Views on State inspection 66 
 
 Oyster industry, Connecticut 
 
 Comparison with Rhode Island 26-28 
 
 Peculiarities of 24, 25 
 
 Table showing rents received from Rhode Island lands 29 
 
 Transference of seed 24, 25 
 
 Oyster inspection, scientific views of Prof. Coe on 70-73 
 
 Oyster investigation, scientific 60-70 
 
 Letter written by Dr. E. H. Jenkins concerning 69-70 
 
 Oyster laws of 
 
 Louisiana 8g 
 
 Rhode Island - 89-92 
 
 Oyster police 
 
 How paid , 31 
 
 Law authorizing Commissioners to appoint 30 
 
 Present system not effective and remedy too expensive 31 
 
 Recommendation concerning 31 
 
 Oyster properties 
 
 Early taxation of 37-41 
 
 Regulations of various states on taxation and ownership of .... 34-37 
 
 Oyster regulations of 
 
 New Haven Board of Health 99 
 
 State of Virginia 100-102 
 
INDEX. 127 
 
 Page 
 
 Oyster propagation 
 
 New Jersey law on 73~74 
 
 Oyster set 28-29 
 
 P 
 
 Police, oyster 30-3 1 
 
 Pollution of streams 
 
 Law of Massachusetts concerning 99-100 
 
 Proposed leasing system of the natural beds 49-5° 
 
 Private growers 
 
 Blank and letter sent to 12-15 
 
 Statistics received from 15-16 
 
 R 
 
 Recapitulation 
 
 Attitude of Board 85, 86 
 
 Federal requirements 84 
 
 Practicality of recommendations 85 
 
 Recommendation concerning 84-86 
 
 Recommendations of Board, summary of 81-84 
 
 Rhode Island blank for oyster house inspection 94~95 
 
 Rhode Island Shell-Fish Commission 
 
 Condemns oysters by federal rules 118 
 
 S 
 
 Sanitary investigation of oyster grounds in New Haven Harbor ...109-123 
 Sanitary survey of New Haven Harbor 
 
 Floats used and location of 1 16, 1 17 
 
 Shell-Fish Commissioners 
 
 National Association of 63-64 
 
 Recommendation concerning number of 80 
 
 Shell-fish, the floating of 53-55 
 
 Sheffield Scientific School fitness for bacteriological studies 70 
 
 Statute appointing State Board of Equalization an Oyster Com- 
 mission 3.10 
 
 Suggestions to oyster house owners by State of Rhode Isalnd 05-99 
 
 Summary of Board's recommendations 81-84 
 
 System of taxation proposed for natural beds 40-50 
 
 Advantages of new 50 
 
 Leases 
 
 Terms of 49 
 
 To whom granted 49 
 
 T 
 
 Table showing results of scientific investigation of New Haven 
 
 Harbor 121 
 
 Table showing estimated receipts under new system of taxation 79 
 
 Taxation, early, of oyster properties 37~4t 
 
 Extracts from previous shell-fish reports, on 
 
 Assessment difficulties 39-40 
 
 First taxing year 38-39 
 
 Objection, futile, of large owners 40-41 
 
 Taxation, a method of 37-38 
 
 Taxation and ownership of oyster properties in different states.... 34-37 
 
 Connecticut 35 
 
 Delaware 35 
 
128 INDEX. 
 
 Taxation — cont. ge ' 
 
 Florida 35 
 
 Louisiana 35 
 
 Maine 35 
 
 Maryland 35 
 
 Massachusetts 36 
 
 New Jersey 36 
 
 New York 36 
 
 North Carolina 36 
 
 Rhode Island 36 
 
 Texas 36 
 
 Virginia 37 
 
 Taxation of oyster franchises 
 
 Complaints pertaining to 41-42 
 
 Defects in basis of ' 42 
 
 No equity possible in present system of 41 
 
 Recommendations concerning a system of 42-44 
 
 V 
 
 Valuation of oyster grounds, minimum 21, 22 
 
 Views of 
 
 Dr. H. W. Wiley on scientific oyster inspection 67-68 
 
 Prof. Coe on field for scientific investigation in oyster inspection 71-73 
 
Cos C 
 
 0- p |5 
 
 J43S 24-.@-*5 
 
 >o-*io 
 
 
MAP INO. 1. 
 
 Accompanying tne report to 
 
 THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY 
 
 Of The Boj^nDorEcHJ/suZATioN 
 
 ASA SPECIAL COMMISSION TO INVESTIGATE 
 
 TiiE Oyster Properties of the State 
 
 M96 
 
 
 
 ISO-) 
 
 
 Public 
 
 
 
 JRKuMTER 
 
 
 \ 
 
 
 
 *s 
 
 
 
 
 
 \ 
 
 
 
 
 N 
 
 
 M97 
 
 \ 
 
 Jo 
 
 
 
 \ 
 
 Henry * 
 
 Geo. H Dayton 
 
 ■• numbers f fhe different 
 - mark (|) are the assessed 
 
 lots. 
 
 ,on, \ 
 
 
 \ 
 
 
 1498 
 
 
 SECTION OF LONG ISLAND SOUND 
 
 OYSTER GROUNDS 
 
 STATE OF CONNECTICUT 
 
 19IO 
 
 Rnt.r BlENNIALBEFORTof A= 
 STATE SHELL FISH COMMISSION 
 
 USED TO SHOW 
 
 ^ASSESSED "VALUATIONS 
 
•Ol/I ^AM 
 
36 
 
 Note. 
 
 Plain figures ar< 
 Figures with do, 
 
MAP NO. 2. 
 


MAP INO. 3 
 
OVT d A hJ[ 
 
*Iain figures are fh 
 
 figures wi'lK do/far 
 
IVIAP INO. A. 
 
■SflS/^ -'-,:.- 
 
PblNT N© POIN" 
 
 i/RAL Bed 
 
MAP NO. 5. 
 
ROUND 
 
 30N 
 
MAR INO. 6. 
 
 Note. 
 
 Plain figures i 
 Figures with 
 
 SECTION OF LONG ISLAND SOUND 
 
 OYSTER GROUNDS 
 
 STATE OF CONNECTICUT 
 
 1910 
 
 Rirtof BIENNIAL BEPORT of ttm 
 STATE SHELL FISH COMMISSION 
 
 USED TO SHOW 
 
 -ASS E S SE D VAL UATIONS 
 
•*WsS<p£a 10-4 It 
 IS7-4S 
 
 33ii 
 
 l50-*75 
 5oo-$as 
 76(6-45 
 
 H.C Rowe 
 
 
 
IV1AR NO. 7. 
 

'E. 
 
 Plain figures are the 
 Figures with dollar t 
 
MAP INO. 8. 
 

 H 
 
 LB N 'I 
 
 ?-