32 



rivers thereby as not to allow any fish to go up during the open 

 season.* In retaliation, the ' upper heritors' became not merely 

 careless of the protection of the breeding fish, but openly and 

 avowedly in many places countenanced their destruction. 



According to the law, the proprietor of a ' several fishery' has 

 a right of property in the fish whilst within its limits, but 

 no longer, or otherwise. The upper proprietors, therefore, 

 have their rights vested in them subject to the rights of the 

 lower proprietors wherever they may own ' several fisheries/ 

 and the rights of both are again subject to the common-law 

 right of fishing in the sea and tideway. The new Act not only 

 gave to the owners of ' several ' fisheries in estuaries power to 

 use Fixed Engines, not only confirmed those in use for ten and 

 twenty years, but gave a power to landlords and tenants to 

 erect new ones under certain circumstances ; all which powers, 

 manifestly tended to the great diminution of those of parties 

 above, already naturally curtailed. 



The object proposed by the promoters of the measure, was 

 ' a just, equitable, and impartial settlement, between the various 

 conflicting interests involved, giving to each as much benefit as 

 was consistent with a due and proper preservation of existing 

 and established private rights, and with advantage to the pub- 

 lic.' Irish Fisheries Bill PampJdet, London, 4th July, 1842. 



This settlement was proposed to be effected; First By the 

 removal of doubts (as alluded to in the clause of the Act) as to 

 the legality of the use of fixed modes of fishing in the sea and 

 tideways; then subjecting them to restrictions, and requiring the 

 observance of the close times by them.f Secondly By requir- 

 ing every trap for the taking of salmon to be opened for thirty- 

 six consecutive hours in each week ;{ by empowering the open- 

 shores; the parties interested above did not find it worth while to proceed 

 against them. In 1824 the police were sent down the river, and cut down 

 these weirs indiscriminately. A collision ensued between them and the country 

 people Evidence of T. Spring Rice, Esq., M.P., (LORD MONTEAGLE,) one of 

 the Select Committee, 1825, p. 157. 



* " There are certain rich landholders (in Ireland), who possess the right of 

 fixing locks and weirs across the mouths of rivers, to prevent salmon from pass- 

 ing; and below these weirs the fish are detained till they are caught; and 

 although an Act of Parliament was long since passed, that these weirs should be 

 open from Saturday night till Monday morning, for the fish to pass freely up, 

 this is wholly forgotten, or neglected to be enforced, by those whose interest it 

 is to require it ; and the consequence is, that the fish are never permitted to 

 proceed up a river so obstructed, till they are no longer fit for food, and in some 

 instances the locks are not at any time opened, even to admit them to proceed to 

 spawn." Colonel Light, Employment of the Poor in Ireland, London, 8vo. 1830. 



f The owners of these engines who did not observe the fence-months or 

 close season, would come in the catalogue of ' the divers wilful persons' alluded 

 to in the Act of Henry VIII. , as only ' having respect to their own wilfulnesse, 

 singular commoditie, and benefite.' 



J Those who failed to observe the Sunday, or weekly close time, are in the 

 category of persons with ' greedy appetites and insatiable desires,' reprehended 

 by the statute of Charles. For such evils the Scottish committee advised more 



