AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. . 2531 



ain confident that nothing of the kind is the case. I give this as my 

 honest opinion. 



Q. You say you have been dealing in the smoked-herring business for 

 along time. Would that business stand an additional tax of 5 cents in 

 gold per box, which is the amount of the old duty ? A. No, it could 

 not, this year in particular. 



Q. Why? A. We are only getting this year, in the American mar- 

 ket, 15 cents a box for our best quality of herring, after they are shipped. 



Q. Would not the customer have to pay the duty ? A. I think not. 



Q. Why not ? A. My experience is to the contrary. I cannot so 

 understand it. 



Q. Explain why you think so ? A. I will tell you how the matter has 

 worked in my experience. I have shipped direct in my own vessel from 

 Grand Manan to Boston smoked herring with other kinds of fish when 

 there was an average duty of 5 cents in gold a box on smoked herring, 

 and I have sold those herring alongside of a man from Lubec who was 

 also selling herring. Mine were equally as good, or if not better than 

 his, and the reputation of Grand Manan herring stands higher than 

 that of Quoddy herring, as is known by everybody who knows anything 

 about it, because we have a better quality of fish. I have sold my her- 

 ring in the Boston market alongside of Lubec herring, and for the same 

 price which the latter obtained, while I also paid 5 cents a box in gold 

 duty at the Boston custom-house. I once took a cargo of about 7,000 

 boxes there in the schooner Belle, and I left $350 in gold at the Boston 

 custom-house, and if the consumer paid the duty I paid it also ; and so 

 I came home minus $350 in gold, which, if no duty had been imposed 

 on Canadian fish, I would have had in my pocket. 



Q. If the captain from Lubec had gone there with the same cargo, 

 obtaining the same price, he would have come away with these $350 iu 

 his pocket ? A. Certainly he would ; that is- clear. 



Q. You thus lost $350 ? A. I did really lose it. 



Q. In other words, without reference to duty you had in the American 

 market to take the price which the American fisherman got there ? A. 

 I had to sell my fish at the same price which he got ; the dealer could 

 pay me no more than he paid him, for my herring were no better than 

 his, and he could not afford to pay me any more for them, as he could 

 get what he wanted from American fishermen ; so 1 was obliged to sell 

 at the same price. 



. Q. You do not believe that the herring fishery could stand the addi- 

 tion mentioned ? A. It could not. It really could not. We were pre- 

 viously driven out of the business of shipping fish to the Boston mar- 

 ket this is the truth of it until the renewal of reciprocity. 

 By Mr. Thomson : 



Q. Did you ever reflect as to whether the imposition of a 5 cents duty 

 on your fish did not raise by so much the price of the fish, so that you 

 got to that extent a higher price for your fish ? A. I think this is not 

 the case. It could not do so. The $350 were taken out of my pocket 

 in this way : they had a sufficient quantity of fish in the American 

 market, which was kept supplied with all that was required at a certain 

 price. 



Q. What price did you get in that particular instance ? A. I do not 

 remember. 



Q. Suppose that fish had been in such demand in the market that 

 you got 20 cents more for them than you actually did receive, and that 

 the Lubec man also obtained 20 cents more; do you think that you would 

 have been paying the duty ? A. Certainly I would. 



