oj the Fishery Board for Scotland. 



9 



assaulting and obstructing bailiffs. In the Forth, the Clerk to the 

 District Board makes a general statement respecting drift and hang- 

 net fishing as follows : — " The District Board have again been under 

 " the necessity of using special measures for the suppression of the 

 " illegal and destructive practice of fishing for salmon by means of 

 " drift or hang nets, which still prevails, though to a greatly 

 " diminished extent, in the lower waters of the estuary. A steam 

 " launch was chartered in order to the efficient watching of 

 " the waters during the last two months of the fishing season, 

 " and detections when made were followed by actions of interdict, 

 " or (in the case of persons who had been previously placed under 

 " interdict) by penal proceedings for breach of interdict. The 

 " District Board are now hopeful that this method of fishing, which 

 " has been so injurious in its effects on the salmon fishing interests 

 " of the river as a whole, will be given up on the Forth as it was 

 " eight years ago on the Tay." 



In the Tay 38 cases were tried in the Sheriff Courts, involving 62 

 persons. The offences were of the usual description, and 53 persons 

 were convicted. 



In the Conon district six fishermen from Cromarty were tried at 

 Dingwall for a contravention of Section 1 of the Salmon Fisheries 

 (Scotland) Act, 1844 [7 & 8 Vict. cap. 95], and were convicted. 

 This section is directed against persons fishing for salmon within one 

 mile of the shore not having a legal right or permission to do so. 

 Prosecutions under the section are uncommon, but complaints have 

 been made for many years that sea fishermen in this district 

 persistently infringed the rights of salmon lessees under the guise of 

 white-fish fishing. It is through the instrumentality of Mr. 

 Middleton, the Clerk to the Conon Board, that the decision has been 

 reached making it necessary for coast salmon fishers to slap their nets 

 on Sunday if their doing so on Saturday evening is rendered 

 impossible by reason of the weather. The decision, given on appeal, 

 by a full bench in the High Court of Justiciary was included in my 

 last year's report (p. 73). Proceeding from this, two cases were tried 

 in the Girvan district during last season, and the Clerk to the Girvan 

 Board refers to the matter as follows : — " There were two prosecutions 

 " against lessees of salmon fishings for omitting to remove leaders 

 " during the weekly close time. One, after lengthy proof, was con- 

 " victed at Ayr Sheriff Court and fined £7 and £3 of expenses. The 

 " other pled guilty at Girvan J.P. Court, and was fined £7 and £1 of 

 " expenses. 



" The Sheriff founded his conviction on failure to remove the 

 " leaders on Saturday before midnight (the weather having been 

 " stormy up to 6 p.m., but fine thereafter), but he indicated that, had 

 " it been necessary, he was prepared to convict for the failure to 

 " remove the leaders at the earliest opportunity on the Sunday, which 

 " was a calm day throughout. 



" The lessees actually did remove their leaders on the Sunday, but 

 " not until 8 p.m., when a boat left the harbour to inspect the leaders 

 " on behalf of the Fishery Board." ' 



The case of Middleton v. Tough, and the review of the similar case 

 of Middleton v. Paterson, also dealt with in the Justiciary Court, as 

 already referred to, have done much to overcome the great laxity in 



