1152 MISCELLANEOUS. 



There is the same authority for estimating the annual catch of fish at 

 one million of quintals. 



I regard the views of M. D. L. Kodet, of Paris, as far more accu- 

 rate. He states that, "without Tier colonies,'" the cod-fishery would 

 "become nearly extinct;" that these colonies " on ly consume annually 

 eighty thousand quintals;" that foreign nations "scarcely take a fifth' 

 of the catch; and that "it is by submitting to the exorbitant duties, 

 which at any moment may be changed into prohibition, that the 

 precarious and trifling market in Spam is retained." A very large 

 proportion, then, of the produce or the cod-fishery is consumed in 

 France; and it is a sufficient refutation of the estimate of the English 

 colonists to say that the quantity remaining after deducting the 

 exports, as computed by M. Kodet, is not wanted in that kingdom. 



The number of vessels since the peace of 1815 has not exceeded 

 four hundred, except in the single year of 1829; and, assuming that 

 the statement in discussion is correct, these vessels employed an 

 average of sixty men each, or double the number which, as all persons 

 familiar with the business well know, is necessary on board as fisher- 

 men, or on shore as "shoresmen." The same fallacy exists as to 

 the catch; for a million of quintals for four hundred vessels is twenty- 

 five hundred quintals to each, or considerably more than double the 

 mean quantity caught by the vessels of any flag in the world. To 

 allow liberally for the catch of the "boat fishery," and to consider 

 "boat fishermen" as included in the estimate, I cannot think that 

 the figures of the English colonial documents are accurate by quite 

 one-half. If further evidence of exaggeration be wanted, it may be 

 found in the grave assertions of the same writers that our own vessels 

 fishing in the waters of British America are manned with upwards of 

 thirty-seven thousand men, and catch in a year one and a half millions 

 of quintals of fish! 



The statements thus refuted are of consequence, as will be seen in 

 another part of this report. 



Equally exaggerated are the averments that the French and Ameri- 

 can fisheries, bolstered up by bounties and prohibitions," have "as 

 completely swept" the English flag from the Grand Bank of New- 

 foundland "as if Lord Castlereagh had conceded the exclusive right" 

 in 1814, or as if the "combined fleets of France and America had 

 forced it" to retreat to "the in-shore or boat fishery;" and that the 

 " French and Americans, having taken possession of the Grand Bank," 

 have, by so doing, "extended lines of circumvallation and contra- 

 vallation round the island, preventing the ingress or egress of fish to 

 and from the shore, and, according to the opinions of those best 

 qualified to judge, greatly injuring the in-shore fishery the only 

 fishery left to British subjects, and that only to a portion of the 

 island." 



Deferring a full answer to these complaints until the subject of 

 colonial allegations relative to our own aggressions and violations of 

 our treaty rights are considered in detail, the only answer necessary 

 to be made here is, simply, that the "ingress" and "egress of fish to 

 and from the shore" lias not entirely ceased, as yet, since the export 

 of codfish from the English Newfoundland fishery amounts to nearly 

 one million of quintals annually ! The lamentations of a people who, 

 though "completely swept" from their own outer fishing-grounds, 

 still show, by their own returns of the customs, that they nave sold, 



