255 



difficult if not impossible to overcome. In the first place, 

 under the shade of those abuses established, recognised, or 

 tolerated by former laws, there will have grown up a crowd 

 of well-to-do interests which it is not possible to disregard, 

 and hence the necessity for a fundamental principle of 

 the law dealing with such cases, if the State does not take 

 measures for satisfying them pecuniarily, of which case we 

 have in Spain so eloquent an example. 



It results from what has been said that the Government 

 should prevent the use of trawling gear, called bou y since 

 ample information and an attentive study show the 

 evident necessity for putting an end to this system of 

 fishing. It has been proposed to issue regulations imposing 

 on its exercise specified limits of time and distance, and 

 forbidding the employment of new gear, but this suggestion 

 is of no avail in practice, as the possessors of such gear 

 naturally desire to keep them as long as possible and never 

 proceed to break them up. Thus the essential point of the 

 law is evaded, which would not be the case if the govern- 

 ment bought up the apparatus and awarded compensation, 

 at the same time absolutely forbidding the employment of 

 such apparatus in fisheries. 



In imposing a system of absolute restrictions, it must not 

 be forgotten that these will be sure to provoke an un- 

 popularity which no government can afford to disregard. 



If, on the other hand, we pass to the opposite point, viz,, 

 altogether free working, it is a Utopian idea that by this 

 means equilibrium will be maintained between production 

 and extraction without any government intervention, as 

 was recently done in the United States in the way Professor 

 Brown Goode so clearly explained to us. 



We do not know, however, if this modern procedure will 

 give in the course of time the expected favourable results, 



