ins 



r. 



PROTECTION OF DEEP SEA FISHERIES. 391 



and he could not understand the idea of compelling a man 

 to remain in his service. Now this is all very well where a 

 garden or a factory is concerned, but in these cases the em- 

 ployer does not find provisions for his men nor yet clothes, 

 as the owner of a fishing vessel is compelled to do before 

 they begin work or he knows anything of them, or else to 

 give up his business for want of hands. Again, the 

 insinuation by the President as to the insufficiency of the 

 y of fishermen has no locus standi ; for, as has been 

 plained previously, the vessels sail on the share system, 

 and the more money the crews earn the more they receive. 

 A more equitable arrangement than this could not be made 

 even in a factory. In a very successful voyage of six 

 months a boy's share has been known to amount to over 

 30, exclusive of his food. It would not do either to pay 

 these crews by the week, as the calling is totally different to 

 that of men at work in a factory, where they can be over- 

 looked. A fisherman when at sea is free from supervision, 

 and, without some incentive to persevere in the shape of 

 participation in the profits, would in many cases ruin the 

 trade. The arguments given above, advanced by the 

 President of the Board of Trade, will show how difficult it is 

 for a department to legislate for a trade, of the general work- 

 ing of which it is ignorant, and much more so of the details, 

 and shows plainly that it ought to be able to command the 

 advice oi practical men thoroughly conversant with all 

 details. The question naturally arises, why was the law 

 altered, as there were no complaints from the trade nor 

 any notification that a change was desired in any way ? 

 The answer is at present a mystery. The trade was in no 

 way consulted, and to satisfy the whims or fancies of 

 somebody, a trade that was working comfortably has 

 been upset, and thousands of pounds have been lost 



