48 
Appendices to Eighth Annual Report 
customary to seize the other contents of the box containing the salmon, 
nor is there any power to do so. By creating forfeiture of the box and 
its contents, it might prevent the sender, in many instances, transmitting 
small quantities of salmon at all, if the other contents of the package 
could be seized and forfeited. 
He also proposes to make it an offence for fishmongers and others to 
deal with foreign salmon in the United Kingdom, unless they are in a 
condition to prove that the salmon is foreign, by means of a special form 
of declaration made at the place from which the fish is consigned, together 
with special marks upon the cases containing the consignment, leaving the 
onus probaridi upon them, such declaration stating the number of fish and 
the sex and weight of each fish. 
Mr Humphreys' thirteenth suggestion is, that the exportation of 
salmon 4 should be absolutely prohibited during close time all over the 
' United Kingdom, and not only from one particular portion. The word 
' exportation should also include the consignment or sending of salmon 
' from one part of the United Kingdom to another, such as from Scotland 
' to England, or Ireland to England, &c.' I quite approve of this 
suggestion. 
It is farther suggested that there should be a clause in the new bill 
making it an offence for railway servants to receive consignments of 
salmon from persons who give fictitious names, and that Fishery Boards 
should have increased powers for the purpose of putting a stop to poach- 
ing, and 'should be compelled to take means for the better preservation 
* of the river by employing an additional staff during the close time and 
' otherwise. 5 
With regard to this last suggestion for the compulsion of Fishery 
Boards to watch the river, and employ a larger staff of water bailiffs 
during close time, I can only say that in Scotland, our District Boards 
protect the rivers and prosecute poachers as far as the assessments which 
they are entitled to levy on the fishings will go. If they are to be com 
pelled to go farther, they must have larger funds put at their disposal. 
Mr Humphreys' closing suggestions are, that power of imprisonment as 
well as of inflicting a fine should be given for offences against the Act ; and 
that ' the consignment of unclean or unseasonable salmon from Aberdeen 
* or Hull, or other places, to London, should be liable to be prosecuted in 
' any county and town through which the salmon passes, whether entirely 
4 by land, or partly by land and partly by water ; as well as at the place 
' from which the consignment is made, and the place to which it is 
' consigned.' 
I quite approve of both of these suggestions. 
I have been thus particular in noticing the suggestions contained in Mr 
Humphreys' elaborate paper, in case any member of the Fishery Board 
should agree with him in thinking that it would be expedient and desir- 
able to carry consolidation and centralisation so far as to have one Salmon 
Fisheries Act embracing the whole of the United Kingdom, and one 
universal and absolute close time for all salmon rivers, regardless of 
whether they are naturally late or naturally early. Personally, I have 
the strongest possible conviction that it would be difficult to imagine any- 
thing more impracticable and inexpedient than an attempt to construct 
a Salmon Fisheries Act which should apply both to England and Scotland. 
It is at all times a difficult task to engraft the laws and usages of one 
country upon those of another, where they have been, for centuries, 
essentially different. The extent and character of the waters over which 
rights of salmon fishing extend ; the nature of the titles required to con- 
stitute a right of salmon fishing j the description of engines used ; the 
