38 CHARLES I. 
in obtaining this information to the nobility and gentry, 
but especially to the free burghs.1 On receiving these 
instructions the Estates appointed a Committee of Lords 
Spiritual and Temporal to discuss these matters with repre- 
sentatives from the burghs and report. 
On August 8th the committee duly made their report.’ 
After deliberation all parties were of opinion that the asso- 
ciation with England in the fishing was very “‘ inconvenient ” 
to the estates. The Scotch “land fishings” extended 28 
miles from the coast, “ whilk is proper to the natives, and 
whairof they have beene in continuall possessioun and neuer 
interrupted thairin be the Hollanders.” The Burghs felt 
themselves able to undertake this “land fishing ’’ without 
the aid of “ anie other natioun,”’ and, in addition, declared 
that Englishmen could not legally fish in Scotch lochs 
and sell their fish in the Scotch burghs. As regarded the 
“‘ Bushe fishing,”’ they stated that the fishing season for the 
year was already far advanced, and that they required time 
to deliberate further on a matter of such importance to 
all.3 
Although they had been furnished with this report, which 
indicated very plainly the reluctance of the Scotch burghs 
to enter upon any such scheme as that proposed by the 
king, the Estates now thought it would be well to have 
from the burghs definite answers to the following questions : 
Would the Scotch burghs and gentry enter into an associa- 
tion with the English for undertaking a common fishing, 
without any reservation, or did they desire to reserve the 
land fishing ‘“ within the loches, yles, and a land kenning frome 
the coasts”? ?+ In their reply the burghs were asked to state 
clearly their reasons “of desyres or refuisall.” With 
reference to this, the following ‘‘ Observations and Answers 
to His Maj. letter to the Council,” by a Scotch writer of 
1 Act. Parl. Scot. vol. v. p. 223. 2 Ibid. vol. iv. pp. 226, 227. 
3 Ibid. vol. v. p. 227. 4 Ibid. vol. v. p. 226. 
