4 THE IMPOVERISHMENT OF THE SEA. 



A^aiu, "The returns from the various centres all over the country 

 have for the most part steadily increased since 1884, and though it is 

 true that large quantities are captured on the Great Fisher Bank, 

 Iceland, and other regions at a distance from British waters proper, 

 yet this is due to the more remunerative nature of the work, and not 

 to the dearth of fishes in the seas at home " (p. 241). 



The foregoing quotations indicate sufficiently the general tenor of 

 Professor Mcintosh's conclusions. Some of these may be readily 

 granted, but the most important ones, which deny the alleged im- 

 poverishment of the older fishing grounds, and even the possibility of 

 depleting them by human interference, are, as tlie Professor admits, 

 "so different from the oft-repeated views and wide-spread opinions of 

 the fishing community and the public," that I have felt the necessity of 

 making an independent examination of the evidence upon which the 

 Professor relies, as well as of the evidences bearing on the English 

 fisheries, which do not appear to have so seriously engaged his atten- 

 tion. These evidences have not hitherto been brought together in any 

 form convenient for reference, so that even if my conclusions should 

 contain any elements of uncertainty, the collation of the scattered data 

 should at any rate serve a useful end. 



One claim, however, is made by Professor Mcintosh, which, though it 

 would not affect the decisions of scientific men, is likely to unduly bias 

 the opinions of the public in the direction of the Professor's views, viz, 

 his claim of a similarity between his own conclusions and those reached 

 by the late Professor Huxley " from a totally different standpoint " 

 (preface, p. x. ; text, pp. 234, 2.35). 



Had Professor Mcintosh claimed a resemblance between his views on 

 the inexhaustibility of the bottom fisheries and Professor Huxley's on 

 the inexhaustibility of the surface fisheries, no objection could be raised 

 to the comparison ; but the implication (however unintentional) in the 

 preceding paragraph is clearly that Professor Mcintosh's views on the 

 trawl fisheries are more or less identical with those entertained by 

 Professor Huxley concerning the same fisheries, although arrived at by 

 different modes of reasoning. Professor Huxley's opinions on matters 

 connected with the sea fisheries are deservedly held in high esteem — 

 whether from the thorough character of his inquiries, or from the 

 liberality and independence of his judgment ; but the views which 

 Professor Huxley expressed on the inexhaustibility of the fisheries are 

 characterised by his usual precision of language, and cannot be con- 

 strued as referring to the bottom fisheries in general. 



After admitting that a salmon fishery (and all river fisheries) can be 

 exliausted by man, because man is, under ordinary circumstances, one 

 of the chief agents of destruction, Professor Huxley asks. Does the 



