SELECT COMMIITEE ON THE SEA FISHERIES BILL. 



93 



11 March 1904] 



Mr. D. Mearns. 



[Continued. 



Chairman — continued. 



all undersized fish, whether flat fish or other. I 

 am against closing the waters without an 

 international convention. 



1716. Then although this Bill would practi- 

 cally not affect Aberdeen, you, as an Aberdeen 

 trawler, are anxious to see the measure passed, 

 in the general interests of the fishing industry 

 in the North Sea ?— I am satisfied that it would 

 be the means of doing a large amount of good 

 to all classes of the trade. 



1717. You believe that it would not only 

 increase the profits in your own trade, but it 

 would increase the food supply of the people ? — 

 Yes, it would. 



1718. When I said that it does not affect 

 Aberdeen, what I meant was that there are so 

 few small fish landed in Aberdeen that the 

 prohibition of landing them would practically 

 make no difference one way or the other ? — It 

 would practically make no difference. I am 

 glad to say that both owners and masters are 

 exceedingly anxious that no small fish should 

 come to market ; in fact, they boycott them 

 when they do come. 



Duke of Ahercorn. 



1719. Do you suppose if the small fish were 

 thrown overboard from the trawlers they would 

 mostly live ? — -I have known plaice to live for 

 ten hours after they are caught, and I am 

 satisfied that if the trawl is hauled perhaps 

 once in two or three hours, and the fish are 

 selected, if they are thrown overboard at that 

 time you will get from 75 to SO per cent, of 

 them to live. 



1720. And you think that you would be able 

 to persuade the trawlers to do that ? — I am not 

 sure that we would be able to prevent foreignei's 

 from doing it ; but my opinion is that the 

 markets of England and Scotland being shut to 

 trawlers they would flood their own markets in 

 a short time, so that the process would be 

 thoroughly unremunerative, and it would be no 

 use going there. 



Lord Heneage. 



1721. With regard to the Aberdeen trade, 

 although you say that the prohibition would not 

 affect them much, there is, of course, a very 

 considerable trade, and you are all unanimous in 

 favour of the Bill ? — We are unanimous in 

 favour of the Bill, and the next gentleman who 

 appears from Aberdeen will be able to say that 

 he has been sent from the Trawl Owners' Asso- 

 ciation to support it. 



1722. And Aberdeen has always joined Avith 

 London and the Humber ports in desiring some 

 such legislation as that before the committee ? 

 — When we first started the fishing industry in 

 Aberdeen we had, unfortunately, Grimsby rather 

 against us, because when the Moray Firth was 

 closed they were under the impression that it 

 was the breeding ground. They have changed 

 their minds now, of course, which I think is 

 quite right. I have no doubt that the opposition 

 tney have to the present Bill is caused by the 

 action of the Scottish Board in closing the 

 waters of the Moray Firth ; but public opinion 

 has altered to such an extent since then that I 



Lord Heneage — continued. 



think the Grimsby people must see the great 

 desirability there is that they should join with 

 their friends in going on endeavouring to get 

 this Bill passed in their own interest. 



1723. I was not referring to the opinion of 

 Grimsby, but to the opinion of Aberdeen. 

 They have been always unanimous in their 

 strong support of other trawlers in desiring some 

 such legislation ? — Yes. 



1724. Then with regard to the other question 

 of the sale of fish, opinion has changed very 

 much, has it not ? — Very much. 



1725. Even at the end of last year there was a 

 very strong feeling in the executive, was there 

 not, that without the prohibition of sale, the pro- 

 hibition of landing would be ineffectual ? — As 

 long as the fishing is conducted on its present 

 lines I quite agree with the remarks that you 

 have made ; and it will be necessary, of coui-se, 

 if we have power to do so, to prevent the land- 

 ing of large quantities of undersized fish. If that 

 was done it would affect the trade very materially 

 for its good. But I quite agree with the remarks 

 you have made, that we are entirely of opinion 

 that this Bill is in the interests of the com- 

 munity generally. 



1726. And now that opinion has so much 

 changed among practical men that they think 

 the prohibition of landing will be quite suffi- 

 cient without the question of sale being touched 

 at all ? — Yes, that is quite true. 



1727. One of the reasons of that, as you are 

 aware, is the experience which has been had in 

 Belgium and Denmark, where they have found 

 the prohibition of landing perfectly effectual, and 

 have never put into operation the sale clauses of 

 their Acts? — Yes, I, understand that is the 



case. 



Lord Northboicrne. 



1728. Do you know Mr. Charles Hellyer, who 

 gave evidence yesterday ? — Yes. 



1729. Have you read his evidence ? — No. 



1730. Did you hear it ? — I heard part of it. 



1731. I am afraid he made some observations 

 which were not altogether complimentary to 

 the part of the world to which you belong. Did 

 you hear those in which he said " We have 

 suffered, of course, up to now from too much 

 Scotch legislation. The whole of the fishery 

 legislation of this country has been dominated 

 by Scotland " ? — I am quiteprepared to say that 

 Hull and Grimsby too are labouring under the 

 impression that the Scotch Acts have been the 

 means of preventing a large portion of ground 

 from being fished which they would have had 

 the benefit of 



1732. He also said that the chief opposition 

 to this Bill came from Scotland ; do you endorse 

 that ? — Yes, I say it is perfectly correct, that 

 they are under the impression that they will be 

 used by the department in the same way as 

 Scotland was used by their department ; but I 

 have endeavoured to show, both to him and a 

 good many of his friends, that opinion has 

 changed very much since then. I believe that 

 if another measure was going to be brought for- 

 ward for Scotland at the present moment, it 

 would be a difficult thing to close any waters 

 without an international agreement. 



1733. Unlesf 



