49 



fisheries investigations and of work at sea, viz., Dr. T. W. 

 Fulton, of the Fishery Board for Scotland, and Mr. 

 E. W. L. Holt, of the Irish Board, are neither of them 

 favourable to the international scheme, and do not think 

 that it is likely to give us, within the specified time, 

 results that will be useful in connection with our British 

 Fisheries. Dr. Fulton (Q. 1U8) says : — " I am quite con- 

 vinced that at the end of five years sufficient information 

 to say whether there is a decrease of the fish supply of 

 the North Sea, on the fishing grounds there, could not be 

 obtained." 



There are other witnesses whose evidence is given in 

 the Ichthyological Committee's report, and who expressed 

 full approval of the international scheme, but I do not 

 think that it can be said that any of these are men with 

 the practical experience of Tizard, Fulton and Holt. It 

 is clear, then, that the argument in the Memorandum 

 drawn up by some of the Committee is supported by the 

 evidence of some of the most important witnesses ; and 

 under these circumstances many must sympathise with the 

 view expressed by Professor Hay Lankester, when, in his 

 evidence, he said: — " I should much prefer to see public 

 money expended on a complete survey of the British Seas, 

 say, to the 100 fathom line all round the British coast, 

 to money being expended on this international 

 arrangement." 



Our conclusion, then, is that the international scheme, 

 although an intoresting scientific investigation, which 

 may obtain results of great importance to the sciences of 

 hydrography and biology, is, from the point of view of our 

 English fisheries, an expensive experiment which is 

 unlikely to yield reliable results of practical importance, 

 within a reasonable time. The programme has not the 

 appearance of having been devised with a view to the 

 D 



