AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2261 



More 70, the Lilly Dale 130, the Eben Dale 88, the Seth Stockbridge 

 none, the T. L. Mago 150, the B. F. Some 1GO, the Magpie Power 90, the 

 Clara L. Dyer 90, the Ocean K/ing 110, the Eunice P. Newcomb 85, the 

 Oasis 60, the Challenger 170, the Ellen M.Crosby 30, the Lottie E. Hop- 

 kins 150, the Etta Gott 226, the Rattler 170, the M. J. Elliott 60, the 

 Edmund Burke 230, the A. C. Newhall 140, the lioger Williams 80, the 

 Lillian M. Warren 120, the Vidette 125, the Win. A. Pew, 160, the Lizzie 

 Poor 150, the Lady Woodbury 220, the Martha A. Brewer, 150, the Geo. 

 B. McClellan, 150, the Waterfall 85, the Gray Eagle 16, the Madawaska 

 Maid none, the Cyrena Ann 60, the Alice M. Gould none, the Fred P. 

 Forye 5, the Eleanor B. Conwell 85. 



These are gathered from the returns reported by them. 



Mr. FOSTER. Do you submit that to our inspection ? 



Mr. DAVIES. Certainly. I would not have read it otherwise. (Ex- 

 plains, in answer to Mr. Foster, that these are returns of vessels that 

 have been in the bay and gone home, as they reported themselves at 

 Canso.) 



Q. Now, have you heard of any of these vessels that made any of 

 these returns ? A. I have heard of some of these vessels writing home. 



Q. Have the returns you have heard accorded with those I have read t 

 A. I should think not. 



Q. You don't know whether these returns are correct or not? A. I 

 don't know that they are. 



Q. If they were, would you be inclined to modify your statement as 

 to the catches in the gulf? A. No, I would not. 



Q. You still persist in the statement you made ? A. I don't know 

 anything about it. 



Q. But supposing it correct, if it turns out to be correct, from com- 

 parison with published returns in Gloucester papers ? A. Well, they 

 might perhaps have the same information upon which that is based. 



Q. You would consider the reports in Gloucester papers to be incor- 

 rect ! A. I didn't say any such thing. 



Q. Would you place reliance upon them 1 ? A. Asa general thing I 

 would. 



Q. What did you mean by saying that the Gloucester papers might 

 have the same information as that I have read? A. The crews some- 

 times report more than* they actually catch. 



Q. Then we cannot believe the reports we see in those papers ? A. 

 Well,' there is a difference between sea barrels and packed barrels. 

 Perhaps the mackerel would fall short. 



Q. That is by the difference between sea barrels and packed barrels ? 

 A. Yes. 



Q. But could not any person easily allow for that ? 



Hon. Mr. KELLOGGr asks if the returns just read are official. 



Mr. DAVIES explains that the returns are those which the vessels 

 make as they pass through the Gut of Canso that they are not official, 

 but that the information is gathered by persons engaged by the inspec- 

 tor to ascertain the catch from the captains. 



By Mr. Trescot : 



Q. Mr. Davies asked you a very simple question, which I am satisfied 

 you could answer if it had not been prefaced by a remark which would 

 astound any man. He asked you if you could turn back the wheels of 

 time. I confess I could not do that. You said you were inspector from 

 1865 up to the present time ? A. Yes. 



Q. I asked you this question : whether in that time, with your knowl- 



