30 



Should it be observed, that all this doctrine 

 applies to angling only, and not to the use of 

 nets or other accustomed modes of fishing ; I 

 answer, that when these observations were ori- 

 ginally made, it was at a time when the ge- 

 neral right was in dispute, and it was then 

 thought, that if the action then pending was 

 persevered in, that the establishment of such 

 general right might be perverted to bad pur- 

 poses, and productive of bad consequences, 

 by encouraging what were termed poachers.* 

 This was one of the reasons that induced the 

 parties claiming the general right, to consent 

 to the accommodation which then took place. 

 But at that time it never could have been con- 

 templated, that those persons who then claimed 

 an exclusive proprietorship in the fisheries, 

 would resort to a practice equally (if not more) 

 destructive than the poachers, that of dragging 

 the rivers with nets, and thus collecting wag- 

 gon and cart loads,| which they frequently do, 



* Query If poachers can exist, where a general right to 

 take fish exists ? " Angling with a rod only could not be called 

 poaching, nor was it ever so esteemed. " By the Lord Chan- 

 cellor, in Rex v. D. of Beaufort. 2nd Chitty, 1034-. 



t However improbable this circumstance may appear, it is 

 nevertheless literally true, and has been practised to this extent. 



