PROTECTION OF DEEP SEA FISHERIES, 479 



doubtful satisfaction to him that he is arrested under a 

 warrant. 



Section 2 recommends that the offender should have a 

 preliminary trial before the Board of Trade officer. The 

 use of this would practically amount to the old law, for 

 when the Board of Trade officer ordered the deserter to be 

 taken to the magistrates there is no doubt but that, as 

 formerly, in most cases the man would proceed to sea. The 

 principle appears to be the same with a little more red tape 

 added to it ; for if the offender were not guilty the Board of 

 Trade officer would not condemn him, nor would the 

 magistrates if the case had come before them. It does not 

 appear to relieve the fishermen from the old ultimatum of 

 imprisonment for desertion, which is professedly to be 

 abolished, but simply to put a little extra form in the way 

 in the shape of a Board of Trade official. Looking at this 

 in this straightforward manner (which has a parallel in the 

 professed abolition of imprisonment for debt, where, because 

 a man does not pay what he has not got, as ordered by the 

 Court, he can be imprisoned for contempt of Court (?) ), and 

 then reading the final advice to the Committee in the 

 minute before commented on, it does not appear likely that 

 the President of the Board of Trade will see his way to 

 adopt it. One thing appears strange, and that is, that the 

 Board of Trade official, who formed one of the Committee, 

 should have concurred in this portion of the report, and 

 even suggested it to witnesses who gave evidence, as a way 

 out of the difficulty. The writer cannot conclude this 

 essay without adding a little more which has since occurred 

 to him on reading the report of a speech made by the 

 President of the Board of Trade in reply to an influential 

 deputation of shipowners which waited on him early in 

 this month (March). To a great extent, though not 



