66 BRITISH FISHERIES 



progress, and was again referred to a Select 

 Committee. That body made the usual laborious 

 inquiry, and met with the same unanimous 

 testimony as to the growing impoverishment of 

 the North Sea grounds for flat fishes, and the same 

 agreement among the deep-sea trawling trade as to 

 the remedy. They felt " that the subject of the 

 diminution of the fish-supply is a very pressing 

 one, and that the situation is going from bad 

 to worse " ; l and they were convinced that the 

 destruction of immature fish was undoubtedly a 

 cause. But the Bill necessarily involved consider- 

 able opposition on the part of the inshore fisher- 

 men ; and though their reasons are somewhat 

 obscure, the Committee rejected the measure. 

 And there the matter rests. 



The Select Committee of 1893, however, made 

 some other recommendations which resulted in 

 legislation of a comparatively harmless nature. As 

 we have seen, the state of fisheries administration 

 differed notably in the two divisions of the United 

 Kingdom. In Scotland there was a strong central 

 authority, but no system of local government, and 

 no evident need for such. In England, on the 

 other hand, there were the newly-formed local 

 committees and a weak central authority, obviously 

 hampered by its intimate connection with the 

 Board of Trade. Both systems lacked the element 



1 Report from Select Committee on the Sea-Fisheries Bill, 1900, 

 p. iv. 



