SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE SEA FISHERIES BILL. 



143 



18 March 1904.] 



Sir A. Vivian, k.c.b. 



[Continued. 



Earl of Tarborough — continued. Earl of Yarborough — continued. 



2543. There are not very many of that larger 2544. Is there any shrimping ? — Yes, there is 



size, are there ?-.-I suppose not. When one is shrimping, 

 yachting about one sees them, good sized smacks, 



rather ketches. The Witness is directed to withdraw. 



Mr. WALTER ARCHER is re-called ; and further Examined as follows ; 



Chairman. 



2545. I think since you were last examined 

 before this Committee you have made some 

 further inquiries as to the effect of a size limit 

 of fish on the reduction of profit to vessels fishing 

 on the eastern grounds ? — Yes. 



2546. Could you just briefly put in what the 

 result of those further inquiries has been ? — 

 Yes. I find that assuming that plaice under 11 in. 

 were worth as much per cwt. as so-called small 

 plaice, the reduction in the value of the total 

 catch was in 1902, 54 per cent., and in 1903, 40 per 

 cent. If it were known, however, that the boxes 

 of so-called small plaice contained no fish under 

 11 in., it is possible they might be worth more 

 than they are at the present time ; a calculation 

 has, therefore, been made of the reduction in 

 profit assuming that fish over 11 inches contained 



Chairman — continued. 



in those boxes were worth as much as medium- 

 sized plaice. On this, in 1902, the reduction would 

 have been 40 per cent., and in 1903, 29 per cent. 

 I have a brief statement showing the assumption 

 basis on which these calculations are based. 



2547. Will you hand it in ?— Certainly. (Hand- 

 ing in the same.) 



2548. Therefore if you assign the highest and 

 lowest possible value to fish under 11 in. the 

 reduction on the total catch of 1902 was between 

 54 and 40 per cent., and in 1903 between 40 and 

 29 per cent. ? — Yes. 



2549. And under these circumstances, in your 

 opinion, it would not be worth while for steam 

 trawlers to go to the Eastern grounds, if those 

 calculations are correct ? — No. 



The Witness is directed to withdraw. 



SiH THOMAS ELLIOTT, k.c.b., is recalled ; and further Examined as follows :— 



Chairman. 



2550. You have had a considerable length of 

 experience in more than one public department, 

 I think, and are probably famihar with what is 

 known as subordinate legislation ; that is to say, 

 legislation by regulations and orders of Govern- 

 ment Departments acting under enabling powers 

 conveyed by Parliament itself. Could you give 

 the Committee a definition of what I may call a 

 subordinate legislation 1 — The term " subordinate 

 legislation " was a term I think first used by Sir 

 Courtenay Ilbert, lately the Parliamentary 

 Counsel, and now Clerk of the House of 

 Commons, who has defined the term as meaning 

 that part of the law which is enacted not directly 

 by the Supreme Legislature, but under delegated 

 powers. 



2551. Can you state what are the advantages 

 over direct legislation of a delegation of such 

 powers ? — I think those advantages are mainly of 

 an administrative character. Every administra- 

 tive change is in the nature of an experiment, and, 

 as Sir Courtenay Ilbert has stated, " The precise 

 mode in which the change will work out, the exact 

 means by which its object can best be effected, 

 cannot be determined with certainty beforehand, 

 and consequently the machinery must be made 

 elastic. This elasticity can best be given by 

 allowing the details to be worked out on the 

 general lines laid down by the Supreme Legislature 

 either by statutory rules or by ofiicial practice." 



2552. Are there certain safeguards which have 

 been provided by Parliament against any abuse 

 of the powers of such subordinate legislation ? — 

 Perhaps, in reply to that question, I might be 

 allowed to say that jurists attach by far the 



Chairman — continued. 



greatest importance to the check on the practice 

 of public departments which is afforded by the 

 expression of pubhc opinion, which often, as your 

 Lordship knows, takes the form of questions and 

 proposals and criticisms in ParHament. Sir 

 Courtenay Ilbert, if I may quote him again, states 

 that " in a country like modern England public 

 opinion is the most effectual, and is usually a 

 sufficient safeguard against any serious abuse of 

 statutory powers." 



2553. Of course, the exercise of all the powers 

 is done under the direction of a responsible 

 Minister, who is responsible to Parliament ? — That 

 is so, of course. 



2554. And whose actions can be criticised in 

 ParHament ? — Yes. 



2555. Then, would you kindly give the Com- 

 mittee some illustrations of existing cases of 

 subordinate legislation by which powers have been 

 entrusted to pubHc departments ? — Perhaps in 

 the first instance I may refer to certain acts which 

 are the subject of Orders made by the Home Office, 

 by the Secretary of State. The Factory and 

 Workshop Acts all contain such powers, and the 

 1901 Act, which takes the place of the earlier Acts, 

 enables the Secretary of State to make Orders 

 dealing with the sanitary condition of factories, 

 hours of labour, fitness for employment, dangerous 

 and unhealthy industries, limits of humidity and 

 work at home. It will be seen that the powers 

 of the Secretary of State under these sections 

 are very wide ; the examples to which I refer are 

 those recent Orders which deal with the use of 

 lead glaze, and those also which deal with the 

 air space of bakehouses. Then, under the Coal 



Mines 



