THE ROYAL FISHERY 109 



" who are very few and know no other way." The English 

 also suffer from a " want of sale of commodities," due to 

 the greatness of Customs, since these are " 20 times more 

 than in the Netherlands," to the dearness of the English 

 ships and their want of suitability for foreign trade, and 

 finally to the high rate of interest in England, this being 

 " about one-third more than in the Netherlands." 



Lastly, the writer refers to the negligent and corrupt 

 curing of fish by the English, which " proceeds from lack 

 of council of trade to inspect," and set forth several ingenious 

 ideas with regard to reviving the fishing industry. He wished 

 this branch of trade to be open to all sorts of foreigners, 

 and " restraint by Corporations " to be abolished. Beggars 

 and all other poor people, provided they were not sick or 

 impotent, were to be employed in the fishery. All persons 

 who had been condemned for any less crime than that of 

 murder, were to be " compelled to redeem their crimes, 

 and in some measure to make compensation, by extra- 

 ordinary labour in this trade." All persons who had been 

 imprisoned for debt, and who could not pay off their debts, 

 were to be sent to the fishing. He proposed that the Act 

 of Navigation should be repealed and foreigners encouraged, 

 and that a Council of Trade should be established in 

 England. Finally he suggested that " all houses built 

 upon new foundations within the city and suburbs of London, 

 since 1657 (except such as have been consumed by fire), 

 pay a fine to the value of one year's rent, to be employed 

 towards the carrying on of the Royal Fishery." 



Since they came contemporaneously with Charles' second 

 declaration of war upon Holland, it was not to be expected 

 that this pamphlet and those of a like nature l that accom- 

 panied it could do much towards reviving the waning fortunes 

 of the Royal Fishery. The war, however, had scarcely 



1 For similar pamphlets see Cal. S.P. Dom. Car. II., vol. 369, No. 263 ; 

 Ibid. No. 264 ; Ibid. No. 265. 



