1874 AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 



Page 107. Graham : 



Q. Yon say that you would prefer a duty on Canadian fish entering American market 

 to the privilege of fishing within three miles of the shore in the bay ? A. Yes ; I should if 

 I went fishing. 



Q. Why ? A. Because I do not think that the privilege amounts to as much as the 

 duties to us. 



Q. Why do you want the duty kept on ? A. Because, in the first place, we would get 

 more for our fish in the United States. 



Q. And when the duty is abolished the price naturally comes down? A. The fish might 

 then be a little cheaper. 



Q. That is your opinion ? A. I do not think that the price would come down much. 



Q. Then why do you want the duty kept on? Do you not think that you gave a rather 

 hasty answer ? You say you would prefer the duty to the privilege of fishing in the Bay 

 of St. Lawrence, within the limits ? A. Yes. 



Q. Why ? I understood you to say it was because this would keep the price up ? A. 

 That was a little erroneous, I think. Let me think the matter over. 



Q. Why would you rather prefer the duty to the privilege mentioned ? A. Because that 

 would keep the price up, and we would then get more for our fish. I thought you had me 

 a little. 



Q. I merely want your statement on the point ? A. That is my candid opinion. 



Q. You now speak as a fisherman ? A. Yes ; if I was fishing that would be my idea, 



Q. All classes of men have selfish motives ? A. I want to get all I can for what I have 

 to sell, and to buy as cheaply as possible. 



Q. And in order to get a high price for your fish, you want the duties on ? A. Yes. 



Page 124. Friend : 



Q. You thought you would get more mackerel and get a better price for them ? A. If we 

 had a duty on mackerel we would get a better price, and would get more mackerel if we 

 fished off shore. 



Page 130. Orne : 



Q. You say you would prefer a duty of $2 a barrel to the liberty of fishing within the 

 limits of the bay ? A. I do. 



Q. Why ? A. Because I think the macke rel which I take to market would then bring 

 more. 



Q. Would the price be then higher by $2 ? A. I could not say. 



Q. What is your belief? A. I believe that would be the case. 



Q. Consumers might appreciate the matter differently ? A. I speak as a fisherman. 



Page 147. Leighton : 



Q. In regard to mackerel, leaving herring out, would yon prefer a duty ou mackerel? 

 A. Yes. 



Q. You speak as a fisherman ? A. Yes. 



Q. Why would you prefer a duty on mackerel? A. Our mackerel would fetch that muck 

 more a barrel. We lose that, you know. 



Q. By the duty coming off? A. Yes; the fishermen lose it. The government does not 

 lote it. 



Q. And the people who eat the fish gain it ? A. Yes. 



Q 'And if you were to speak to a man whose business was consuming mackerel, you 

 would get an opinion adverse to a duty ? A. Yes. 



Q. Yon would not object, I suppose, to run the duty up a little higher; how would that 

 suit the fishermen ? A. I think that is about right. 



Page 160. Riggs: 



Q. Yon say you would prefer a duty being imposed on our ma ckerel to the right to fish 

 inshore m British waters? A. I should. 



Q. Why do you want a duty on f A. It is no benefit to us to fish inshore, that I ever 

 saw. 



Q. Why do you want it on ? A. Well, we would have a better market for our fish. 



*V 1 ii y " gct a hi lier P rice for th em ? A. We should ; yes. 



. An< therefore you are speaking as a fisherman ; as such you would like to get the 

 highest price you could for your fish ? A. Certainly. 



Q. You think that the imposition of a duty would give you a better market? Yes; if 

 -anadianH had to pay the duty it is likely they would not fetch the fish in. 



> the result of that ?-A. We would have a higher price and a quicker 



Q. You would have a higher price ? A. I do not know that this would be the case or 

 anything about it, but it would be a quicker market for us. 



