in the following pages, to examine some of. its ar- 

 guments. 



In a question which has been so often before the 

 Courts of Law, it may be supposed that many 

 legal distinctions exist, which lawyers only could 

 readily apprehend ; I shall therefore content my- 

 self with the statement of the law, given by the 

 Author of the Pamphlet above alluded to. He 

 says, page 17 : " That although the decisions re- 

 " garding stake-nets, hitherto pronounced,- apply 

 " only to friths, it is impossible to anticipate what 

 " views our Courts of Law may entertain on this 

 " subject," (that is to say, stake-nets in the open 

 ocean) " though it is not to be forgotten, that when 

 " the decisions in the Tay case were pronounced, 

 " more than one judge is reported to have expressed 

 <; an opinion, that the operation of the Statutes ex- 

 " tends to the ocean, ' to wherever the tide ebbs 

 " or flow r s.' " This is the natural cause of the present 

 alarm among the proprietors of stake-nets, and we 

 must allow that they have good reason for appre- 

 hending that their profits must soon cease. In this 

 dilemma, they tell the public that they have, in 

 fact, made a wonderful discovery in fishing. They 

 can suspend a net on long fir poles and carry it 

 out a great way into the sea, and thus intercept a 

 great quantity of fish. Now, to apply so many 

 fine words as skill and machinery to such a con- 

 trivance as this, is hardly fair; and I hope I am 

 not speaking irreverently when I say, that it may 



