302: HISTORY AND METHODS OF THE FISHERIES. 
salt any sort of fish (that is intended to be dried) in cask or fattes, or any other way than what 
“hath formerly and honestly been practised for the making of dry fish, on penalty of forfeiting all 
such fish so salted and pickled, whether it be green or drye; the one moiety thereof to the use of 
the poor of the town where the offence is committed, and the other moiety to the person that shall 
sue for the same. 
“And it is further enacted by the authority aforesaid, 
“[SEcT. 2.] That henceforth no mackrel shall be caught (except for spending whilst fresh) 
before the first of July annually; and no person or persons whatsoever, after the publication hereof, 
shall at any time or place within this province take, kill, or hale ashore any mackrel, with any 
sort[s] of nets or sa’ens whatsoever, on penalty of forfeiting all such mackrel so taken or haled 
ashore, and also all such nets or sa’ens which were so imployed; the one-half thereof to their majes- 
ties towards the support of this their government, and the other half to him or them that shall 
inform and sue for the same. And all justices are hereby impowered, and required to grant their 
warrants for the seizing of the same and the aforesaid forfeitures, or the receiving of the like value 
in current money of this province. [Passed November 26, 1692.]”* 
1702.—Re-enactment of prohibitory laws. 
“AN ACT for the reviving and re-enacting a clause in the act intituled ‘An act for the regulating and encouragement 
of fishery’ that hath been for some time repealed by the General Assembly. 
“Whereas, in the second paragraph of the said act it is enacted ‘that henceforth no mackerel 
shall be caught (except for spending whilst fresh) before the first of July annually’; and whereas 
the said clause, by an act afterwards made and passed by the general assembly [1692-3 Feb. 8.], 
was repealed and made void, which said repeal and the unseasonable catching of mack{[a]rel there- 
upon hath been experienced to be very prejudicial to this province,—Be it therefore enacted by 
His Excellency the Governour, Council and Representatives [convened] in General Court or Assem- 
bly, and it is enacted by the authority of the same, That the said clause above-recited shall be and 
is hereby revived and re-enacted, and that henceforth no person or persons whatsoever shall pre- 
sume to catch or cause to be caught any mack[aJrel, (except for spending whilst fresh,) before the 
first of July annually, on penalty of forfeiting all the mack[a]rel so caught contrary to the true 
intent and meaning of this act, and twenty shillings per barrel over and above for each barrel of 
the same; the one-half of the said forfeiture to be to her majesty for and towards the support of 
this her government, and the other half to him or them that shall inform and sue for the same in 
any of her majesty’s courts of record within this province. [Passed November 11, 1702; signed by 
the Governor and published November 21, 1702.]” t 
2, PROTESTS AGAINST GIGGING AND SEINING IN THE PRESENT CENTURY. 
1838-9.—Protests against gigging —The Boston Journal protests strongly against the bar- 
barous method of taking mackerel called ‘gigging,’{ and urges that it is not only liable to censure 
on the score of humanity, but it is also impolitic, and that if this destructive method of fishing is 
generally continued a few years longer it will break up the fishery. We -have for a year or two 
past enterta‘ned a similar opinion, and probably the complaints now so frequently made by the fish- 
ermen that, though mackerel are plenty, they ‘will not bite, is owing to the custom of ‘gigging! 
* Acts and Resolves of the Province of Massachusetts Bay. Vol. 1, 1692-1714, p. 71. Province Laws, 1692-3. 
Chap. XXXII. 
t Ibid., p. 507. 
tThe method of capture called “ gigging” here is undoubtedly gaffing, since a fish-gaff is even yet called a “gig” 
by some of our fishermen. 
