1864 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 



Mr. THOMSON. And I say that the substance of the statements which 

 appear on page 128 is exactly the opposite. 



Mr. FOSTER. 1 dare say. Mr. Davies was then examining; but the 

 statements from which I quoted were made in cross examination. 



Mr. THOMSON. The following statement appears on page 44 of Mr. 

 Foster's argument: 



That would make 2f>,404 barrels caught in British territorial waters the first year of the 

 Treaty. What were these mackerel worth? Mr. Hall tells you that he buys them, landed 

 on shore, for $3.75 a barrel. 



This is the point to which I wish to call your attention. I cannot 

 comprehend why Mr. Foster' should assume the value of the privilege of 

 taking these fish to be fixed by the cost of procuring them. It seems 

 to me quite clear that the value of fish in the water is just their value 

 in the market, less the cost of procuring them and transporting them 

 thither. 



However, taking his own method of valuation, this calculation is based 

 on the statement which Mr. Hall makes, that he bought up these mack- 

 erel for $3.75 a barrel. I have looked over Mr. Hall's evidence, but it 

 is very difficult to say whether he meant that he paid $3.75 a barrel by 

 reason of having his men in his employ on particular terms, or that he 

 got them at that price ; but George McKenzie, who was also a witness, 

 states on page 132 of his evidence that he paid $6 a barrel for mackerel 

 this year. Now, these two statements are entirely at variance, if Mr. 

 Hall meant that such was the actual value of the fish when they were 

 taken out of the water and transferred to him. 



Mr. FOSTER. Mr. McKeuzie testified as follows, on page 132: 



Q. Then do you pay as high as $6 a barrel for fresh fish ? A. Yes. 



Q. How much did you pay last year ? A. We did not then pay higher 

 than $1.50. 



Q. That would be $4.50 a barrel ? A. Yes. 



Q. And the year before last? A. The price then was the same as it 

 was last year. 



Q. How much did you pay four years ago ? A. About the same, from 

 $1 to $1.50. 



Mr. THOMSON. As you will perceive, Mr. McKenzie states, as I said, 

 that he has given $6 a barrel for these fish this year, as against the 

 price which Mr. Hall chose to say he only pays, or '$3.75 a barrel. Mr. 

 McKenzie says that these fish cost him $6 a barrel. Mr. Foster's calcu- 

 lation is based on the statement made by Mr. Hall, and this is here con- 

 fronted with the evidence of Mr. McKeuzie. 



If your excellency and your honors believe that the evidence given 

 on this point by Mr. McKenzie is correct, and you must judge between 

 tbe two tlie calculation of Mr. Foster is necessarily at fault, 



Mr. FOSTER. Mr. McKenzie buys his fish by the hundred, and he es- 

 timates the number offish contained in a barrel; that is the way in 

 which lie makes out the price as being $6 a barrel. 



Mr. THOMSON. Mr. Foster says, "That would make 26,404 barrels 

 cangbt in British territorial waters that year," which was 1873. Now 



take Mr. Foster's own figures in this matter. He further says, on page 

 44 : 



T i! 8 - "i" H i' 1 "' first Vt ' ar f tllc trp ' lt y> an<:i f " p were imported into the United States from 



Uioh Provinces '.(), H^tbarrels, on which the duty of $'2 a barrel would amount to 



?\ ,776. J lie value of the fish that our people caught is $99,000, and the British fishermen 



gain in remission of duties nearly *""** ' 



This is the only year which Mr. Foster has selected. 



