( 44 ) 



the rest that they continue stationary. In Madras, out of 

 64 answers, 6 give an increase, 12 a stationary state, and 46 

 a large decrease or a decrease. 



LVIII. Whose are these fisheries ? Those which are 



Fisheries, whose property they leased out by Government of course are 

 are. Government property; those in per- 



manently-settled districts likewise would unquestionably 

 belong to the owners of the soil. But these are not the chief 

 ones in many places. In whole districts no rents have been 

 collected for a longer or shorter number of years on philan- 

 thropic grounds, a license which has been abused by the 

 people, who have taken the advantage of slaughtering every- 

 thing they possibly can. Can this license be considered equi- 

 valent to Government having given up their rights, or can 

 they resume them ? Paterson in his legal work. The Fishery 

 Laws of Great Britain, observes respecting inhabitants of 

 towns in claiming a right to fish, on the ground of ancient 

 custom : " In such cases the acts of such anglers are more 

 likely to be referable to the license of the owner, who, if he 

 pleases, may allow all the public or a portion of the public 

 to angle there. But no length of time, during which such 

 acts are capable of being explained on the ground of license, 

 can prevent the owner putting an end to such license. He 

 may resume his original rights at any moment and withdraw 

 the license, for no man ought to have his rights abridged by act- 

 ing liberally towards the public and his neighbour" (para. CV). 

 LIX. I now propose tracing out, from such records as 



why British rules and regu- * available, how it is that British 

 lations have had a disastrous rule appears to have had a most 



disastrous effect upon the fresh-water 



fisheries of the Indian Empire. I assume that it cannot now 

 be denied (see para. LVII) that the amount of fish in the fresh- 

 waters has decreased, and is yearly diminishing ; but many of 

 the reporters, erroneously as I believe, advance the opinion 

 that fishing is carried on as it has been from time imme- 

 morial, consequently laws are not required for regulating the 

 mode of capturing the finny tribes. I do not think that fishing 

 is now what it was during native rule, but I believe it can be 

 shown that great and most destructive innovations have been 

 or are being permitted, and that the British, with the most 

 philanthropic intentions, have given to the people license in 

 fishing that has been greatly abused, and is now destroying the 

 fisheries. The natives evidently perceive this themselves ; thus, 

 in the Central Provinces, the Tehsildar of Sironcha (para. 266) 



