OF MASSACHUSETTS. 29 



the two preceding sections, control, regulate or prohibit the taking of eels, 

 clams, quahaugs and scallops within the same; and may grant permits pre- 

 scribing the times and methods of taking eels and such shellfish within such 

 cities and towns and make such other regulations in regard to said fisheries 

 as they may deem expedient. But an inhabitant of the commonwealth, with- 

 out such permit, may take eels and the shellfish above-named for his own 

 family use from the waters of his own or any other city or town, and may 

 take from the waters of Ms own city or town any of such shellfish for bait, 

 not exceeding three bushels, including shells, in any one day, subject to the 

 general rules of the mayor and aldermen and selectmen, respectively, as to 

 the times and methods of taking such fish. The provisions of this section 

 shall not authorize the taking of fish in violation of the provisions of sec- 

 tions forty-four and forty-five. Whoever takes any eels or any of said 

 shellfish without such permit, and in violation of the provisions of this sec- 

 tion, shall forfeit not less than three nor more than fifty dollars. 



Responsibility has thus been transferred from the State to the towns, 

 and they alone, through their incompetence and neglect, are to blame 

 for the decline of the shellflsheries. The town laws are miniature copies 

 of the worst features of the State laws. While a few towns have suc- 

 ceeded in enacting fairly good laws, the majority have either passed no 

 shellfish regulations at all, or made matters worse by unintelligent and 

 harmful laws. It is time that a unifled system of competent by-laws 

 were enacted and enforced in every town. 



The ill-advised features which characterize the present town laws are 

 numerous, and are best considered under the following headings : — 



(1) TJrdntelligent Laws. — One of the worst features of our town 

 shellfish laws is their extreme unfitness. Numerous laws which are ab- 

 solutely useless for the regulation and improvement of these industries 

 have been made by towns, through men who knew nothiug about the 

 shellflsheries. These laws were made without any regard for the prac- 

 tical or biological conditions underlying the shellfish industry. It is to 

 be expected that laws from such a source would often be ill-advised 

 and unintelligent, but under the present system it cannot be avoided. 

 Until sufficient knowledge of the habits and growth of shellfish is ac- 

 quired by the authorities of State and town, Massachusetts can never 

 expect to have intelligent and profitable shellfish laws. While the ma- 

 jority of these unintelligent laws do no harm, there are some that work 

 hardship to the fishermen and are an injury to the shellflsheries. 



(2) Unfairness; Town Politics. - — Town politics offers many chances 

 for unscrupulous discrimination in the shellfish laws. Here we find one 

 class of fishermen benefiting by legislation at the expense of the other, 

 as in the case of the quahaugers v. oystermen. In one town the oyster- 

 men wiU have the upper hand; in another, the quahaugers. In every 

 case there is unfair discrimination, and a resultant financial loss to 

 both parties. The waters of Massachusetts are large enough for both 



