of the Fisher ij Board for Scotland. 
17:; 
this clay ignorant of the migratory movements of the herrings which fre- 
quent it.* 
Subsequent to the Union of Scotland and England a great number of 
Fishery Acts were passed, and some of these deal with the question of 
over-fishing or mode of fishing. In the reign of Anne and in the reign 
of the Georges, such legislation found its way to the Statute Book. In 
some cases these Acts were local, or did nut apply to Scotland, and when 
they did apply to Scotland, they referred almost, but not quite, 
exclusively to the herring fishery, which then as now was the most 
important. Certain conspicuous examples may be found in the present 
century. 
Such, then, was the general nature of legislation affecting this subject 
until about thirty- five years ago, when the second phase or period began. 
It was characterised by the prevalence of a liberalising and liberating 
spirit and the removal of restrictions. This movement, associated in 
Great Britain with the names of Huxley, Shaw-Lefevrc, Caird, Lyon-Play- 
fair, Walpole, and Buckland, undoubtedly originated in the reforms flow- 
ing from the doctrines of Cobden aud Bright, and was in complete accord 
with the commercial and industrial spirit of the times. It was connected 
with important contemporary inquiries into the condition of the fisheries ; 
but it is easy to trace in the official publications the operation of the 
influence referred to. It underlay many of the questions asked, and gave 
colour to the conclusions drawn from the evidence obtained. It may at 
once be said that the removal of restrictions was the only logical course at 
that time, by reason of the almost complete absence of statistical and 
scientific knowledge of fisheries; but the progress of the movement, 
no doubt, was accelerated by the unhappy consequences of certain 
legislation affecting the Scottish herring fishery — legislation founded 
mainly upon such hypothetic views as we have seen to be reflected in the 
mind of King Charles more than two centuries before. 
It is noteworthy that this liberating movement was not confined to this 
country. In Holland, where for centuries the fisheries had been subjected 
to the most minute regulation and supervision, the revolt broke out even 
earlier than in England. The public mind was not only prepared for the 
change, but demanded it. Fierce and protracted debates occurred in the 
legislature, and pictures of Dantesque gloom were conjured up of what 
might happen if the fabric of legislation, under which, it was said, the 
great fisheries had elevated the nation to a pitch of unexampled prosperity, 
was sapped. Nevertheless, a Eoyal Commission was appointed in 
1854 — one of the most important of recent times — to determine whether 
the existing sea fishery laws should be repealed in toto } or whether any of 
them should be retained ; and, as a result, sweeping reforms were subse- 
quently made. One recommendation of this Commission was that every 
one should be left free to fish where, when, and how he found most con- 
venient — a doctrine subsequently repeated in Huxley's aphorism to fish 
' where you like, when you like, and as you like.' In Belgium also, in 
1865, a Eoyal Commission was appointed, which reported strongly against 
interference either as to time, place, or mode of sea fishing. 
In this country several Commissions or Committees of Enquiry recom- 
mended in the same sense, the earliest of which were connected with 
the Scotch Fisheries. The great Commission of 1863-66 went very 
exhaustively into the subject, and apparently found no trustworthy 
evidence of over-fishing ; and they recommended \ that all Acts of Parlia- 
i ment which profess to regulate or restrict the mode of fishing pursued 
* The Fishery Board have recently authorised an investigation to be made on the 
migrations of the herring, and experiments on those visiting the Ballantrae Bank 
were begun by the writer during the spring of the present year (1892). 
