! ' 



348 



" Q. You would not mind coiiiiiif; in three and n half miles if yon were four miles out, I suppoao ; 

 sometimes tliey wotiKl inunnge to '^ct in throe miles ? — A. Nn vessel that I have ever hcen in. 



" Q. I am not speaking of the vessels, b>it the fish — is there anything to stop them at four miles < 

 —A. No. 



" Q. There is no obstruction of any kind. Just as good water ? — A. Yes, only a little 

 shallower. 



" Q. Just as good feed ? — A. Yes. 



" y. I'eihaps better feed i — A. AVell, most generally the gides drive them off, but they come back 



again. 



" (i. I suppose when the wind is a little offshore, the best feed would be inside, close in ? — A. 

 Yes. 



" (v>. ('loser inside than four miles ? — A. I should say so. 



" (.}. They would then go in pretty close ? — A. Yes. 



" Q. You would then go ii there and drift off ? — A. Yes. 



" Q. And the lleet would do that. We have evidence of that. The fleet would run in as close 

 as they could get and then drift ofl' ? — A. Yes, that was the way- they tished. 



" Q. As close as they could get in ? — A. Not within four miles. 



" Q. I was referring to a little closer. I wanted to come in a little closer if I could. I was 

 throwing a little bait ? — A. Well, i)robftbly there might have l)een some fellows got in handier. 



" Q. Some would go in handier ? — A. Yes, some of the captains went in. 



" Q. Let us make a compromise and say three miles and a half. You don't object to that, do 

 you ? " — (No answer.) 



George Friend, of Gloucester, whose evidence is to be found on page 119 of the 

 United States, was produced and examined by Mr. Foster. He had many years' 

 experience of fishing in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, having fished there every year from 

 1855 to 1860, and owned several fishing schooners, two of which were seized, but after- 

 wards released. He gave evidence that the great body of his mackerel were caught 

 more than three miles from the shore. 



He was cross-examined, and at page 123 the following record appears : — 



By Mr. Wcatherbc: — 



"Q. Between 18G8 and 187(5 you had five vessels fishing? — A. Yes. 

 " Q. And you made three mackerel trips ? — A. Yes. 

 " Q. And you lost money by them ? — A. Yes. 



" Q. Where did the vesaels tish — outside of the three mile limit ? — A. 1 could not tell you. 

 " Q. You have no idea whcic they fished ? — A. No. 



" Q. You had three ve.s.si'l.<; fishing in the bay — you sent them there ? — A. Y'es. 

 " Q. They ciime lionie, and yoii lost money by the trips ? — A. Yes. 



" Q. Ancl you undertake to say that you do not know, and never made any in(iuiry whether the 

 vessels fished inshore or outside ? — A. Yes. 



" Q. You never made any inq\ury about it ? — A. No." 



This witness also stated that lie was not aware whether any of these vessels had 

 fishing licenses from the Canadian Government. 



" Q. is the j)rivilege of using the inshore tisheries of any use to you as lishermen ? — A. No. 

 Personally I say no. 



" Q. Do you know that practically yourself ? — A. That is my opinion. 



" Q. You never fished in.slinrc '. — A. No. 



" (}. Therefore you arc not able to say so from your own knowledge I — \. I tislied offshore for the 

 ver)' reason that 1 thought 1 .should do better there. I had a perfect right to come inshore. 



" (J. You lo.st money, you «ay ? — A. Yes. 



" <^. Did you every try inshore fishing ? — A. No. 



" Q. But you say the jmvilege of inshore is of no value '. — \. That is my opinion. 



" Q. For what reason ; — A. 1 gave you my reasons. It would keep the vessels out of the harbours 

 and they would get more mackerel. 



" t»>. What else ? — .\. Tjicn we would not have so many drafts. They lay in the harbours too lonj, 

 and go into harboura when it comes night. 



" (I. Is it not the practice for the fishermen to run into the shore and drift oft', and then run in 

 again ?^A. It is not always you can drift off shore. 



" Q. Js the ])rivilege of goin^; inshore an advantage to yon ^— A. If the mackerel were inshore it 

 would corlainly lie an advantagi- ; if they were not inshore, it wo\dd not bo an advantage. 



"(}. You never tried wlietlicr the in.slioro wa.s not better than the outshore fishing; why did 

 you not try it ? — A. liecausc I thought I coiild do letter outside. 



" (i. Year after year you lost money. As a bu.siness man, why did you not try fishing inshore 

 like other fi.shermen who have made money ( — A. I don't know where they are ; they are very much 

 scattered. 



■ }. Why did you not try '. — A. Because I thoiight I could do better oflishore. 

 y. Do you know of any vessel which tished within three miles of the shore ? — A. Not 

 personally. 



" Q. Why do ynu say not i.ersoually ? — A. Because I do not know any one. I never saw them 

 in there fishing. 



" t^ Did you hear of any vessel which fished inshore '. — A. I could not t«ll what I have heard. 



