NORTH ATLANTIC RIGHT WHALE. 169 



any parte of that coaste, and into any bay, river, cove, creeke or shoare, belonging thereto, to 

 kill and order to the best advantage, without molestation, they makeing noe wilfull waste or 

 spoyle." ' 



To what extent the inhabitants of Rhode Island availed themselves of the whaling privi- 

 leges thus granted, there seems to be little record. It may safely be inferred, however, that 

 whaling was carried on in the adjacent waters, and that dead whales, probably in large part 

 those previously wounded, were from time to time driven ashore by wind and tide. Here, as 

 elsewhere, such flotsam was considered a perquisite of the Crown, provided that no proof could 

 be shown that the whale had been harpooned by the whalers. But the Crown officers seem to 

 have been rather lax in the administration of such prizes, until in 1686, at a town meeting at 

 Westerly, March 24, it was "VOATED: that whereas sundry fish of considderable value have 

 been formerly cast up within the confines of this towne, and have been monopolized by pertic- 

 uler persons bellonging to other jurisdicttions, whereby his Majesty and subjects have been 

 wronged of their just Rights and priviledges; And to protect the like for the future, The Towne 

 doe order, That if any Whale, Dubertus, [a name applied to the Finback Whales] or other great 

 fish of considerable value shall be cast up within the limmits of this Towne, the person or per- 

 sons that shall first find it shall forthwith make the Authorities and Inhabitants acquainted 

 with the same, that his Majesties Right may be secured, and the remainder to be equally 

 divided among the inhabitants; and the person or persons so doeing shall be duly Recom- 

 pensed for their paines And if any person or persons shall presume to break up any such 



fish or fishes, before publycation thereof, According to this order, he or they, or either of them, 

 shall pay thirty pounds sterling as a fine to the towne, and return the fish that they have 

 taken." The "perticuler persons bellonging to other jurisdicttions" may well have been 

 some of the more energetic whalers of Stonington or New London, who at this time were proba- 

 bly active in the shore fishery. The large amount of the fine (30) imposed for breach of this 

 order is indicative of the determination of the people at Westerly to permit no more 'drift' 

 whales to be cut up and carried off by their brethren of neighboring towns. This order of 

 Itisd, it will appear, is practically the same in its tenor as the law that existed in 1652 in the 

 Plymouth Colony, making the "drift fish" public property to be shared equally by the inhabi- 

 tants, after the Crown had been accorded its due portion. That so few echoes of strife over 

 the possession of whales are heard from Rhode Island is perhaps evidence that they were little 

 pursued by the settlers of its shores. 



After the devastating French and Indian Wars, attempts were made to stimulate the fishing 

 industry, and in March, 1751, the General Assembly at Providence passed an act for encourag- 

 ing the "whale and cod fishery within this colony." To this end a bounty of four shillings 



1 Records Colony of R. I. and Providence Plantations, 1857, vol. 2, p. 16. 

 Denison, F. Westerly (Rhode Island), 1878, p. 223. 



