THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1863 21 



particular portion of it, to justify him in so 

 occupying it as to prevent others from fishing in 

 his vicinity. If, for instance, a line fisherman 

 chooses to set a line in a part of the sea where 

 trawlers are working, he has to take the risk of 

 interference by the latter, and he can resort to 

 ordinary legal methods to obtain redress, if he 

 can show that the trawler wilfully or negligently 

 damages it. But he cannot reasonably expect 

 that trawling should be prohibited from the locality 

 in his particular interest, or in the interest of the 

 class of fishermen to which he belongs. 



On the other hand, the State (so the Com- 

 missioners contended) may reasonably prohibit or 

 restrict one kind of fishing in the interests of others. 

 If one method is greatly superior to others, then 

 the latter may be restricted, for it is in the public 

 interest that the greatest catch of fish may be 

 obtained at the least possible expense of capital 

 and labour (provided that no permanent harm 

 is done to the fishing grounds), for then the 

 public food-supply is increased and cheapened. 



The State may also make regulations to secure 

 the preservation of peace among fishermen at sea, 

 and for this end it may prohibit or restrict any 

 particular method of fishing. For instance, seiners 

 and drift-netters worked together in Loch Fyne. 

 There was much to be said in favour of a policy 

 of non-interference in this case, if it had been 

 possible, for the method of fishing with seine-nets 



