ON THE CHANNEL-FISHERIES. 97 



men using trammel or trawl-nets, either by means 

 of the great costs and difficulty of prosecuting upon 

 the said recited act, or by other means ; but such 

 fishermen cast their trammel or trawl-nets so near 

 the shore as they think proper, contrary to the let- 

 ter and spirit of the said recited act, in the bays, 

 creeks, and coasts of the said counties, and to the 

 very great and manifest prejudice of the pilchard, 

 herring, and other fisheries on the said coasts j 

 the nets of which are broken to pieces or other- 

 wise injured by the said trawl-nets, as well as to 

 the very great injury and destruction of the fry and 

 breed of sea fish in general ; be it therefore en- 

 acted, that from and after the passing of this act, 

 if any person or persons shall in any year from the 

 1st of June to the last of December, presume to 

 take any fish in the high sea, or in any bay, pool, 

 creek, or coast of or belonging to Devon or Corn- 

 wall, with any drift-net, trammel, trawl, or stream- 

 net or nets, or any other net or nets of that 

 sort or kind, unless it be at the distance of one 

 league and a half at least from the respective 

 shores, shall, upon every such fishing within such 

 distance of the said coast, as allowed to be proved by 

 the oaths of two credible witnesses, forfeit and pay 



though this conduct is unlawful and the effect of it is personally 

 prejudicial, it cannot be put an end to, because the remedy is 

 practically unattainable. Let it then be asked whether such a 

 public mischief should be without an effectual redress ? Who 

 is to prosecute through the attorney-general? the idea is 

 quite absurd. 



H 



