Bibliographical Notice. 423 



observing stations, as it is puzzling to follow the recital of the 

 data thereon. We had to refer constantly to those contained in the 

 oth, Gth, 9th, and 14th Ann. Hep. F. B. S. 



Subsidiary short headings defining the year's operations would 

 likewise have been advantageous to the reader. It is curious to 

 observe that the Professor throughout sticks to the original 

 Scottish " Frith " (so pronounced north), whereas " Firth " is the 

 recognized orthography among geographers, the Admiralty charts, &c. 



Whatever the issue of this fisheries controversy, the writer of the 

 volume has given cogent reasons for his views. Something may bo 

 said on both sides. It has to be noted that the Board has without 

 intermission for a dozen years dunned the government for a trust- 

 worthj" sea-going steamer. To their credit also they have carried 

 out quite a variety of valuable scientific researches — to wit, on sea- 

 fish, crustaceans and shell-fish, their food, breeding, hatching, bait, 

 North-Sea currents and fishing-grounds, besides physical observa- 

 tions, &c., wherein Prof. M'Intosh and his pupils have contributed 

 a fair quota. On the other hand, their critic has been indebted for 

 their hundreds of pages of statistics for much of his data. Their 

 patent mistakes have been in jumping hastily at seeming conclusions 

 based on the superabundant year 1887 ; in ignoring the well-known 

 natural fluctuations of seasons' fishings and weather influences ; 

 again, in not placing due weight on night-fishing and irregularity 

 of experiments during hot and cold months, thus being led astray in 

 contrasting the five yearly periods. Hence Prof. M'Intosh quite 

 reasonably views the matter in a different light, and the every-day 

 experience of fishermen in a commercial sense lends him support. 

 The Board's case is undermined by their own admission that the 

 areas of closure have not improved and that shore-spawning is not 

 the habit of the bulk of marketable fishes. 



Moreovcr,in papers already referred to, Dr. Fulton himself says: — 

 " Simple prohibition merely of the landing or sale of the [immature] 

 fish may do more harm than good ; regulation to be effective should 

 be exercised at the fishing-grounds or in connexion with the 

 fishing ; and when the difficulty of carrying out sim[)le police regu- 

 lations is remembered, it is clear that this ohstade will be verii great." 

 [Precisely so ! The italics are ours.] " In declining fisheries the 

 mere protection of immature individuals has not been effective ; it 

 has been found necessary to supplement restriction by artificial 

 cultivation." All this, and other statements, appears to us amply to 

 justify Prof. !M'Intosh*s contentions. 



Here also comes in the 3- and the 13-mile limit, awkward and 

 conflicting in several ways. As Mr. George Alward (of Grimsby) 

 observed at tlie Conference of the Nat. Sea-Fish. Assoc, 1898: — "I 

 say it will be a sorry day when the people of England attempt to 

 extend territorial limits. There can be only one result, and that 

 would be that a line would be drawn down the centre of the 

 North Sea, and the nations on either side would claim their part.'' 

 Our share would not be the best of the bargain. Nor would it abate 

 friction one jot, but rather give rise to international jealousies and 



