25 
inquiry was held as to the advantages derived from these 
restrictive bye-laws in this particular bay, the result of 
which was that the late Sir Richard Griffith, as Chairman 
of the Commission, resolved to put an end to these restric- 
tions, and this was done much against the wish of those 
who opposed trawling. The effect had been that all 
classes of fishing in that bay had greatly improved. There 
was another bay where the same restrictions against 
trawling were imposed in the same year, and had remained 
to this day, and at the present time the fisheries there were 
more deteriorated than they were fifty years ago, when 
trawling was first interfered with. It would no doubt be 
asked, Why did he not repeal that bye-law? Well, he 
certainly was inclined to repeal it, and invited the trawlers 
to give evidence on the point; but they did not come 
forward, and therefore there was no power for the Com- 
missioners to act. 
Dr. DAy said he did not think the remarks of Mr. Brady 
had anything to do with the subject in hand, but he could 
not help thinking he had given opinions in the place of 
reasons, and statements in the place of facts. He could 
not help thinking that there might be trawling going on 
and fisheries might improve, but who that knew anything 
about fishing would admit that because you got a number 
of fish you must be improving fisheries? Acting on that 
principle, if you killed all the fish you would be improving 
the fisheries. He could not see that trawling could by any 
possibility improve fisheries in a bay, unless it killed 
certain carnivorous fish; however, this question would 
come forward at another time, when it could be more fully 
discussed. With regard to the Paper of Sir James Maitland, 
he would remark that that gentleman had taken up a position 
which was taken up by the Government in most foreign 
