40 



MINUTES OF EVIDEXCE TAKEN BEFORE THE 



4 March lflU4.] 



Mr. . Doughty (Member of the House of Commons).- 



[Continued 



Lord Tireed mouth — continued. 



think that we ought to have a higher Umit still 

 for turbot and brill ? — I should say for turbot, 

 brdl and plaice it would be no worse if it 

 were 12 inches. 



668. You put plaice as high as 12 inches ? — 

 I would not like to say definitely for plaice, but 

 '■ertainly for brill and turbot. 



669. You have not formed any distinct opinion 

 as to what the limit should be, but you think 

 there should be a limit beloAV which such fish 

 should not be landed or sold ? — Yes. 



670. And in your viev/ the proper way to 

 enforce it would be by means of a convention 

 between the various nations fishing in tlie 

 North Sea ? — Yes. 



671. And that the same limit should be 

 applicable to fishermen of all descriptions ? — 

 Yes; and I should prefer very much myself 

 that there should be an area, if it could be 

 arranged, that the great areas on the other side 



672. You would like to have a close time ? — 

 of the Eastern grounds could have a limit of time. 

 Yes; I think that is a far more reasonable 

 solution of the difficulty, if it could be arranged. 



673. Would not the powers on the other 

 side rather object to a close time being imposed 

 there if no close time were imposed off British 

 shores ? — I do not know why, if the same con- 

 ditions obtain, there should not be a limit. 



674. But the same conditions do not arise <■ — 

 But we have not got the long flats that they 

 have. Nature has made these grounds, so to 

 speak, for these fish, and they ought to be pre- 

 so'ved, I think, for two or three months in theyear. 



(]75. "What do you say to the other power 

 which it is proposed to give the Board under 

 this Bill, to pronibit steam trawling withm the 

 three-mile limit ? — They cannot trawl within 

 the three-mile limit now, you know. I think 

 the Fisheries Committees, generally, especialty 

 the Eastern Fishery Committees, have carried 

 out their work very well indeed, and what they 

 have done has been to distinct advantage. 



676. But are you in favour of giving the 

 Board the power to close steam trawl mg within 

 the three-mile limit all round the coast { — There 

 is no steam trawling Avithin the three-mile limit 

 all along the coast. 



677. But there might be in certain places :' — 

 I do not think there ought to be. 



678. It is proposed in the Bill that the Board 

 of Agriculture and Fisheries is to have that 

 power, a power which is already given to the 

 Fishery Committees, to prohibit steam trawling 

 mthin the three-mile limit ? — It seems to me, 

 according to this BiU, that the Fishery Board of 

 Scotland and the Irish Fishery Board would 

 have the same power that the Board of Agi-i- 

 culture would have to apply that ; but it might 

 not follow that they would apply the same 

 principle. 



679. But the Scottish Fishery Board have 

 already power to prohibit steam trawling within 

 the thiee-mile hmit, and they have done so ? — 

 I do not know that there are any Fishery Com- 

 mittees round the coast of England that have 

 not done the same. 



680. That is not my question. My question 

 is, do you approve of the Board of Agi-iculture 

 being given this power besides the Fishery Com- 



Lord Twcedmouth — continued, 

 mittees having it ? — If the Fishery Committees 

 round the coast now have the power I do not 

 see Avhy it need be conferred upon any other 

 Depaitment necessarily. 



681. The Department might think it was 

 desirable to make a general closing all round the ■ 

 coast ? — There could be no harm in their having 

 the power, because I am certain they would not 

 exercise it arbitrarily against the Fishery Com- 

 mittees. 



Earl of Titrhoroivgh. 



682. You said that so far as your information 

 goes the small fish come from all over the North 

 Sea ? — At cei'tain times of the year I am told 

 there is small fish to be found in all parts of the 

 North Sea. 



683. There would be some difficulty then, 

 would there not, in arranging the area to be 

 prohibited, if it was an area ? — Yes, but only to 

 this extent of course, that the real home of the 

 small fish at certain periods of the year is on the 

 coast of Holland and Germany ; all along the 

 Dutch coast there are scores and probably 

 hundreds of thousands of tons of it at certain 

 times, and I believe if that coast could have a 

 close time, for three months say, that would I'e- 

 people the North Sea. 



684. You said that you were in favour of an 

 international agreement. We were told yester- 

 day that at the conference at Hamburg foreign 

 coimtries are inclined to follow the lead given 

 by Great Britain ? — That was what Cobden said 

 in respect to Free Trade. So far as I am con- 

 cerned I should want a convention settling the 

 thing before we were committed definitely to a 

 proposal of that kind. 



Lord Heneage. 



685. Following up Lord Yarborough's question 

 what we were given to understand, both yesterdav 

 and to-day, by those who were present at : 

 Hamburg is, that foreign countries are not - 

 willing to move until' England moves, because by 

 far the largest catch comes to England, and tin y 

 think that she ought to take the first step towards 

 making any law ? — I think England is the party 

 to move first, because we are the largest con- . 

 sumers and catchers of fish, but it should be in 

 the w-ay of a convention if they do come to terms. 



686. I understand you to say that there had 

 been a large increase in the amount of fish 

 caught during the last two years. You did not 

 include plaice in that, did you ? — Yes. 



687. You are, of course, aAvare, though perhaps 

 you have forgotten it at the moment, that the 

 number of plaice has been reduced by one-third 

 during the last year ; there were one-third less 

 brought in in 1903 than were brought in in 

 1902. In the year 1902 there were 1,276,000 

 odd plaice brought in ; last year there were only 

 887,590 broughtin? — I have not seen those figures. 



688. So that there was a reduction of one 

 third last year in the catch brought into 

 England and Wales ? — I only took the aggregate 

 amount of fi.sh, taking our own port, which is by 

 far the largest. 



689. But that is all kinds of fish ?— Yes. I 

 suppose.during the last two years there have been 

 25,000 more tons caught, but we ha\^ not any 

 more catching power. 



690 But 



