AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 2841 



Various causes have been assigned for this condition of things, and, among others, the 

 alleged diminution of the sea-herring. After a careful consideration of the subject, how- 

 ever, I ani strongly inclined to believe that it is due to the diminution, and, in many 

 instances, to the extermination of the alewives. As already remarked, before the con- 

 struction of dams in the tidal rivers the alewife was found in incredible numbers along 

 our coast, probably remaining not far from shore, excepting when moving up into 

 the fresh water, and, at any rate, spending a considerable interval off the mouths of 

 the rivers either at the time of their journey upward or on their return. The young, 

 too, after returning from the ocean, usually swarmed in the same localities, and thus 

 furnished for the larger species a bait such as is not supplied at present by any other 

 fish, the sea-herring not excepted. We know that the alewife is particularly attract- 

 ive as a bait to other fishes, especially for cod and mackerel. 



A. Do I say mackerel ? 



Q. Yes. A. That is an iuadverteiice. I do iiot think that the ale- 

 wife is a bait for mackerel. 

 Q. You say : 



We know that the alewife is particularly attractive as a bait to other fishes, espe- 

 cially for cod and mackerel. 



A. Well, I should not have said that. 



Q. The alewives are the same as the fish we call gaspereaux iu New 

 Brunswick ? A. Yes. 

 Q. You further say : . 



Alewives enter the streams on the south coast of New England before the arrival of 

 the bluefish ; but the latter devote themselves with great assiduity to the capture of 

 the young as they come out from their breeding-ponds. The outlet of an alewife pond 

 is always a capital place for the blue-fish, and as they come very near the shore 

 in such localities, they can be caught there with the line by what is called " heaving 

 and hauling," or throwing a squid from the shore, and hauling it in with the utmost 

 rapidity. 



The coincidence, at least, in the erection of the dams, and the enormous diminution 

 in the number of the alewives, and the decadence of the inshore cod-fishery, is cer- 

 tainly very remarkable. It is probable, also, that the mackerel fisheries have suf- 

 fered in the same way, as these fish find in the young menhaden and alewives an attract- 

 ive bait. 



You see you say that twice. A. That is an inadvertence. 

 Q. You say : 



It is probable also that the mackerel fisheries have suffered in the same way, as these 

 fish find in the young menhaden and alewives an attractive bait. 



A. This is the case on the northern coast probably. 



Q. It is hardly an inadvertence ? A. It is an inadvertence. It is a 

 conclusion that is not justified by the fact. 



Q. Then you dissent from that opinion now? A. Yes; I do not con- 

 sider that it has a bearing on the mackerel question. 



Q. All that goes to show that all these speculative opinions are enti- 

 tled to' little weight; you see that you have changed your opinion in 

 this respect ! A. Certainly ; as the data vary the conclusions also vary. 



Q. I suppose you will admit that there is not the slightest reason why 

 within the next three years you may not have come back to the same 

 opinion which you now repudiate, or have then formed opinions totally 

 different from those which you now express before the Commission ? 

 A. I cannot say ; that will depend entirely on the facts as they conie. 



Q. After all, this is all the purest theory ? A. It is an hypothesis ; it 

 is not a theory. 



Q. Well, it is an hypothesis ? A. It is not a theory until it is abso- 

 lutely certified by the facts. 



Q. Then, of course, an hypothesis is more vague than a theory. You 

 gave in a mass of figures just now, which you state were made up by 

 your assistant, based upon information which you have got from some 



