204 
BULLETIN OF THE UNITED STATES FISH COMMISSION. 
to this matter, that it is possible to practically exterminate open sea tish. But, as I before remarked, 
there is considerable difference of opinion on this subject, especially in view of modern appliances 
dealing with classes of fish that congregate closely in great schools and upon limited areas. By means 
of immense nets operated by steam, fish are now taken, not as in olden times by hook and line, but 
as many as hundreds of barrels at a single haul. 
But apart from that, a matter about which there is practically no dispute is the unwisdom of 
their being harassed in the early part of the year and during the spawning season by being pursued, 
as they sometimes are, l)y five hundred or more vessels, plowing among them and dispersing tliem 
from our coast, driving them far out to sea where it is difficult to get them and, of course, much more 
expensive to dispose of them after they are caught. Especially is this realized in the warm season of 
the year — and the mackerel fishing season proper is mainly from about the 1st of July to the 1st of 
November, running through the warm mouths of July and August — when the fish are taken at a point 
remote from shore, and when there must, of course, bo more expousivo arrangements made for 
preserving them until they can bo properly handled. 
Therefore, sir, the concurrent testimony being that, independent of the question of extinction, 
while the fish are coming into our shores and during this earlier i)ortion of the season embracing at 
least a greater part of the spawning season, they should not be disturbed, and should not be harassed 
until fully upon our fishing-grounds and lifted for consumption, I have come to the conclusion (with- 
out myself knowing by experience anything at all of this business, but after conferring with those 
who have experience and from reading the productions of those who are considered authorities upon 
the question) that the passage of a bill of this character is a reasonable and conservative step, and 
so far as food products are concerned will tend to cheapen the supply of food. I am all the more 
strengthened in my sup])ort of this measure because it seems to be in accord with the almost unani- 
mous wish of the men who catch the fish and see the need of some regularity and system. 
It may be well to remark that of the fleet we have engaged in this business, 358 vessels in 1885, 
carrying 5,125 men, all but four of the vessels came from the States of Massachusetts and Maine. 01 
those four, one comes from Portsmouth, N. II., one from Connecticut, one from Pennsylvania, and one 
from New York. I believe the princi 2 ial opposition will come from my distinguished friend from 
Now York [Mr. Hewitt], who, I supi»ose, rejiresents that single vessel. 
Mr. Reagan. Will my friend from Arkansas be kind enough to state (because I have not exam- 
ined the bill) in what waters the bill 2 )ro 2 ioses to control fishing? 
Mr. Breckinridge, of Arkansas. We do not specify any waters in the bill. We can not do that. 
The bill seeks to prevent the landing of mackerel from the 1st of March to the 1st of .June, wherever 
they may lie caught, iqion the theory that if peo{)lo can not land and sell them they will not catch them. 
Mr. Reagan. What 1 wish to ask the gentleman from Arkansas, in this connection, is if there is 
anything in the bill that apjdies to the waters within the marine league of the shore on our State 
coasts. 
Mr. Breckinridge, of Arkansas. There is nothing in the bill that affects the waters within the 
marine league, at least no thought of interference is entertained, nor is there anything that applies 
to the lish caught in the estuaries along our shores. 
Mr. Reagan. I asked the question because there was a bill referred to the .Judiciary Committee 
for the purpose of extending to citizens of each State the rights granted to citizens of any other State 
to fish for floating fish- 
Mr. Collins. They reported adversely on that bill. 
Mr. Breckinridge, of Arkansas. This has no connection with that bill. 
Mr. Reagan. That is what I understand, that the Committee on the Judiciary reported adversely 
as to the authority to do that. How, then, can authority be assumed to do it here? 
Mr. Breckinridge, of Arkansas. But we do not touch that question ; this has reference to deep 
sea fish. Wo do not say, or 1 do not wish to say, that citizens of the United States shall not catch 
fish within the jurisdiction of the State. 
Mr. Reagan. But if you disregard the principle that the waters within the marine league 
belong to the States, and if this bill applies to such waters, then you do restrict the rights of the citi- 
zens of the State. 
Mr. Reed, of Maine. We do not touch that question at all; this applies to the waters beyond the 
marine league. 
Mr. Breckinridge, of Arkansas. This has reference, as the gentleman will observe, only to the 
fishing for mackerel, which do not run up the streams or come into the estuaries. They are an open- 
