12 



8 M.^rch 1904] 



minutes of evidence taken before the 

 Mt. Alexander Millikin. 



[Continued- 



Lord Ticeedmouth — continued. 



uito Scotland, namel)-, that fiat fish below a 

 certain size should not be landed ? — Yes, it 

 "would be advantageous, but to a very smal 

 extent. 



337. You do not think it would be the means 

 of saving the lives of many small fish ? — A very 

 small proportion. 



338. In what way would it be regarded by the 

 ;'.-hermen of Scotland? — They would look upon 

 : : as a source of irritation. 



339. Do you think it would be difficult _ to 

 induce them to accept such a prohibition 

 1 ivally ? — I do not think they would. 



^40. Do you think they would try to evade it ? 

 — They would look upon it as an unnecessary 

 law so far as they were concerned — that it would 

 do so httle to carry out the object of the Bill, 

 that is to save alive the young flat fish. 



341. Then your opinion is that the object of 

 the Bill being to increase the supply of good 

 marketable flat fish, the provisions of the Bill 

 would not materially assist it ? — Xo, I do not 

 think so. 



342. Can you teU me why ? — There are 

 several ways I would look at it. In the first 

 place, if you preA-ent their taking these smaller 

 tish they would direct all their energies to the 

 larger fish, and it is the larger fish that propo- 

 gates the species — the mature fish. 



343. You mean to say they would catch more 

 spawning fish then ? — ^They would try to. 



344. Do you think it would be impossible to 

 enforce this prohibition if it was passed into 

 law ? — Certamly it would be possible, but at very 

 great ejspense. 



345. Do you think it could be enforced by the 

 fishery officers all round the coast ? — If }"ou in- 

 creased their number three times, they might 

 do it ; it just depends upon the number of 

 people to examine these boxes of fish when 

 they are landed. 



Lord Heneage. 



346. You say that it would cause a gre;it deal 

 of in-itation in' Scotland if a Bill of this sort was 

 enacted ? — Yes, if it was to be carried out. 



347. Do you know Mr. Thomas "Walker, of 

 Aberdeen ?— Yes, I have met Mr. Thomas 

 Walker. 



348. He has a very large trade amongst the 

 trawlers, has he not ? — He is one of the trawler 

 owners. 



349. He is a representative man ? — Yes. 



350. Would you disagree with him in saying 

 that if foreigners were prevented from landing 

 and selling undersized fish all over this 

 country that would settle the question of their 

 going to catch them, as there would be no 

 market for them ? — I do not think that ; I do 

 not think it would prevent it. 



351. But I suppose he speaks for the trade, 

 does he not ? — It would prevent the landing of 

 them, but it would not prevent the catching of 

 them. That is my point. 



352. But he says it would prevent the 

 catching. 



Lord Norihbowme. 



353. How long have yoii been in your present 



Lord Xorthhov me — continued, 

 office ? — Five years : and I was three years assis- 

 tant inspector. 



354. Then you have been eight years at this 

 business ? — Yes. 



Lord Ticeedmouth 



355. But before you were assistant inspector 

 you were a fisherj' officer ? — Yes, for 22 years. 



Lord Northbourne. 



356. Have you observed any diminution in 

 the supply of these fish during the time you 

 have been in j^our present office ? — No, it has 

 always been "a steady increase year after 

 year. 



357. As regards size, have thej' become 

 larger ? — Not as regards size but quantity. 



358. How has the size been aftected ? — That I 

 would not venture an opinion upon. 



359. I suppose if j'ou were to put this Bill 

 into operation you would largely increase the 

 number ot your inspectors and your fishery- 

 officers ? — Yes, to carry out the Bill it would 

 require it. 



360. Do you think that would be advanta- 

 geous for the fishery industry ? — No. 



Chairman. 



361. You have read the Bill { — Yes. 



362. Supposing it were passed to-morrow what 

 do you think would be the operative effect of 

 it ? — I do not think it would save auv flat 

 fish. 



363. I want to know what you would have to 

 do in your department. Supposing the Bill were 

 passed to-morrow, what do you imagine would 

 be the executive action that your department 

 would have to take under it I — In the first place 

 there are three distinct particular trawling points 

 in Scotland — Grantor or Newhaven, Dundee, 

 and Aberdeen. I should say rou would have to 

 appoint 20 men at least to examine these boxes 

 over these districts, if it is to be done effectively. 



364. And from what ships would they be 

 landed ? — Trawlers. 



365. Steam or sailing ? — Steam. ^Ve have no 

 sailing traAvlers. 



366. Do you imagine they would have to 

 examine the fish landed from the smaller fishing 

 vessels ? — No. 



367. Only from the steam trawlers ? — Only 

 from the steam trawlers. 



368. Belonging to the companies ? — Yes. 



369. Do you know what the opinion of the 

 companies is as to this Bill ? — I do not. 



370. You do not know whether they them- 

 selves wish to see the Bill or whether they do 

 not ? — I do not know. 



371. As a matter of fact do these steam 

 trawlers go to the sea around Heligoland ? — It 

 would be difficult to say where they do not 



go- 



372. Have you ever looked at their logs ? — 



No, I have never seen a log. 



373. And you do not know as a matter of 

 fact where they do go ? — No ; but just in general 

 conversation going round the coast 1 learn 



J^nerally 



