quantity. I suppose the hon. Minister knows 

 that. Here, then, is a regulation that is being 

 violated ajll over the lakes. Recently a 

 challenge was issued to the department to 

 deny this. I refer to an article published in 

 the Toronto " News " on the subject of 

 " Fishery Frauds," which I will read : 



Editor "News." — Having long been a supporter 

 of the Conservative party, and occupying a some- 

 what prominent position in the councils of the 

 party, I feel it ray duty to warn the Fisheries 

 Department that the carrying out of the present 

 scheme to secure support for that party during 

 the coming elections will compel all lovers of 

 liberty, of whatever political persuasion, to unite 

 in hurling from power a Government that seems 

 determined to eradicate from this country the 

 last, vestige of British liberty and fair-play, and 

 reduce an iriportant class of our people to a posi- 

 tion of political servitude unknown in any other 

 portion of che British Empire. 



Now, Mr. Editor, I will lay before your readers 

 as briefly as possible an outline of the scheme 

 referred to, and challenge the Minister of Fish- 

 eries to deny its correctness. Should he deny it, 

 my object will be accomplished, as it will tend to 

 show that the present programme will be aban- 

 doned. According to the present law, all holders 

 of gill-net licenses are allowed to use for sailing 

 boats (i,000 yards of net, and for tugs 12,000 yard?. 

 This amount is admitted by all parties to be ab- 

 surdly small and insufflcient to pay running ex- 

 penses, and yet the department has steadily re- 

 fused to alter or amend, the law, though repeated- 

 ly urged to do so. 



And for why ? Simply because they are de- 

 termined to keep the fishermen at their mercy, 

 subject to their dictation. Now. it is a fact that 

 cannot be denied, that there is not a fisherman on i 

 Lake Huron, or Georgian Bay, but what is using j 

 mere than four times the amount of net allowed 

 by law. Will the Fisheries Department dare 

 deny this ? I presume not, n.ir dare they deny 

 that lishery overseers and Conservative politicians 

 have advised fishermen to ignore the law and use 

 all the nets they please, urging them to show their 

 gratitude in return in supporting the rule of the 

 present Dominion Government. 



And so on. But what I wanted to show 

 is that It is a matter of notoriety thart: 

 considerably more no'.ting is used than 

 is allowed by the regulations of the depart- 

 ment. I have talked with many practical 

 fishermen and they tell me that it is simply 

 impossible to carry on their business with 

 the amount of netting now allowed by the j 

 department ; they would simply have to quit 

 the gill-net fishing business if they are to be 

 compelled to fish in that way. 



I have already referred to the injurious 

 effects of the regulation respecting pound- 

 nets. Kight opposite the county of Essex, 

 where our men ai*e refused more than one 

 net except in a few privileged cases, there 

 are as many as 33 pound-nets in a sti'ing. 

 This involves a great hardship. I brought 

 one special case to the notice of the Minister 

 myself, the Black case. A poor fisherman 

 had prepared for a second pound-net upon 

 some promise of the fishery overseer, and 

 had gone to an expense, I think he said, of 

 $300 or $400, which is a considerable amount 

 few a fisherman — but afterwards was re- 



Speaker, is in 

 A fee of .*»:.50 



fused the additional license. 1 visited 

 the department several times, and re« 

 presented this matter to the hon. Minister, 

 and it was a long time before he would 

 I grant the second pound-net even under these 

 circumstances. It was only after affidavits 

 had been produced to show that the promise 

 had been made that the second pound-net 

 was granted to this man Black, and that in 

 the waters immediaitely opposite the county 

 of Essex, there are as many as from 20 to 

 33 nets in a string, that the application was 

 granted. 



The lake opposite, I may say, is complete- 

 ly encompassed with nets. It is said there 

 is as much as 700 miles of netting on the 

 American side of Lake Erie, and this prac- 

 tically in the same waters as our own, 

 because if a fish is not caught on one 

 side it will be caught on the other. And yet 

 even under these circumstances, we find the 

 Minister hesitating and haggling with this 

 poor fisherman and throwing him out of 

 nearly a summer's work before granting 

 him a second pound-net. 



Another grievance, Mr 

 reference to the licenses 

 is charged for a single pound-net. Thirty- 

 two men could fish 80 pound-nets, and on 

 the present basis, thirty-two men would 

 be paying more license fee than is paid 

 by the 24,000 fishermen of Nova Scotia. 

 I would not go so far as to say that we 

 should do away with all license fees. I 

 would not go so far as to take the fisheries 

 entirely out of Government control, yet the 

 present system of patrolling the lakes, cost- 

 ing:, as it does, over $20,000 annually, is a 

 veiy expensive system. 



Another favourite tlieory of the hon. gen- 

 tlemen and his professors is that fish rem.'iin 

 in Canadian waters, and that this policy of 

 restriction is in the interest of Canadian fish- 

 ermen and of the people of Canada. If that 

 w;is so, if the fish was here for Canadians, 

 there would be some justification for the 

 policy. But I would ask the hon. gentleman, 

 where this 800 million pounds of fish is to 

 be found to equal the excess of the catch 

 of American fishermen in the last 20 years. 

 Why, Sir, if that theory was correct that 

 Canadian fish remained in Canadian waters, 

 ard that the 800 million pounds of fish re- 

 nained here, the Canadian waters would 

 teem with fish, would be fairly alive with 

 fish, there would be no depletion of our 

 fisheries. That is a complete answer to 

 the statement and argument of the hon. 

 gentleman. 



Now. another point is in reference to the 

 whitefishery. The hon. gentleman said in his 

 speech : 



What was the staple fishery of Lake Erie only 

 a few years ago ? It was the whitefish fishery. 

 It was the whitefish that was turned over in the 

 American market, it was the whitefish that 

 brought gold to the fishermen on both sides of 

 the lake. That is a superior fish, and a fish of 

 grett value. But there Is no whitefish fishery on 

 Lake Erie to-day. 



