1680 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 



purse-seines are too deep; that they are cut by the ground, which is 

 rocky ; that it is impossible to shorten them without scaring the mack- ' 

 erel which must be taken by seines run out a great distance, for they 

 are very quick of sight, and very suspicious of man ; and they soon find 

 their way out of the seines, unless they are laid a considerable distance 



oft. 



\Ve need not catch our mackerel bait, any more than our cod bait, 

 within the three-mile limit. On the contrary, the best mackerel bait in 

 the world is the menhaden, which we bring from New England. All 

 admit that. The British witnesses say they would use it were it not 

 that it is too costly. They have to buy it from American vessels ; and 

 they betake themselves to an inferior kind of bait when they cannot 

 a fiord to buy the best bait from us. And another result is that the 

 Americans have shown for many years that what are called the shore 

 mackerel, that is, those that are caught off the coast of Massachusetts 

 and several other of the New England States, are really better than the 

 bay mackerel. The evidence of that is the market prices they bring. 

 It is not a matter of opinion. We have not called as witnesses persons 

 who have only tasted them, and might have prejudices or peculiar tastes, 

 but we have shown the market value. 



James H. Myrick, page 433 American Evidence, in answer to the ques- 

 tion, {i For a few years past, which have sold for the highest price, 

 number ones from the bay or number ones from the American shore ?" 

 says, " O, their shore mackerel have been the best quality of fish." 



Benjamin Maddocks, of Gloucester, page 134, says: 



Q. Well, I take No. 1 then. How do those marked as No. 1 shore mackerel compare 

 with those marked as No. 1 bay mackerel? A. Well, the bay mackerel, at least I 

 should say the shore mackerel, has been a great deal better than the bay mackerel the 

 last seven or eight years. 



Q. That is not simply an opinion, but the market prices are better? How much 

 ni<>re do the No. 1 shore mackerel bring than the No. 1 bay mackerel? A. Well, there 

 lia> been $7 or &i difference between them. I have seen the time when the bay mack- 

 erel was equal to our shore mackerel. It has not been for the last seven years. 



It is also true, a matter of testimony and figures, that the American 

 catch, the catch upon the American shore, is very large, and has in- 

 creased, and is attracting more and more the attention of our people 

 engaged in fishing, and it is only this year that the shore fishing proved 

 to be unprofitable, and the confiding men who were led to send their 

 vessels to a considerable extent, though not very great, into the gulf, 

 by reason of the British advertisements scattered about Gloucester, 

 have come away still more disappointed than they had been by the 

 shore fishing, because they had employed more time and more capital 

 than their catch compensated them for. There are some statistics 

 which I will read, taken from a prominent and trustworthy man, as to 

 the American catch. David W. Low, on page 358 of the American 

 Evidence, states the figures as follows: 



Barrels. 



I'.U vwwls in gulf, average catch 109 barrels 40,546 



li' ' i 1 ** 1 *" 1 " ort 8llore . average cat ch 222 barrels 33, 552 



Mackerel caught by boats and some eastern vessels packed in Glou- 



"' . 19,028 



Mackerel inspected in Gloucester 93,126 



^ 



lt*75. 58 vessel* in gulf, average catch 191 barrels 11,078 



11< veiwehj American shore, average catch 409 barrels 47,853 



58,9-21 



M -average catch isbasfd on the average catch of 84 vessels from 17 firms in 1869; 

 MNb in bay and 12 vessels off American shore from 20 firms in 1875. These 

 liriua have douc better than the rest 



