224 
BULT.ETIN OF THE UNITED STATES FISH COMMISSION. 
Now, ill respect to this very experiment, I desire to say that Frofessor Baird — to quote him 
again, hecaiise his is tiie best aiitliority in this country uimu the question — Professor Baird lias said 
that he believes it is worth wliile to try the exiierimeiit ol' this legislation, and I sulmiit, Mr. Chair- 
man, that his testimony should receive the consideration of this House and should be regarded as 
almost decisive in its elfect. 
It is said that this movement is almost exclusively in the interest of the fishermen of Maine and 
Massachusetts. It can not ho denied that it is in the interest of the lishermen of Maine and Massachu- 
setts, hut it is not urged here to-day because it is in their interest; it is urged because it is believed 
to be in the interest of the peo])lo of the whole country, and almost certain to result eventually in 
inqiroving the character and the amount of the sujiply of this food. Oeiitlenien know very well that 
Professor Baird, who is a philanthropist as well as an accomplished man in his iirofcssioii, would not 
encourage legislation of this kind if ho did not believe that eventually it would have a good effect. 
Mr. Bucuanan. Mr. Speaker, the first section of this bill iirovides — 
TLiat for the period of five years from and after the pass.age of thi.s act, no mackerel, other than wliat is known as 
Spanish mackerel, caught between the 1st day of March and the 1st day of June, inclusive, of each year, shall be imported 
into the United States or landed upon its shores. 
The object of the bill is to prohibit the iiidiscriminato slaughter of mackerel during the spawning 
season by the use of purse nets. That, as I understand from the promoters of the bill, is its sole object. 
But the bill as drawn will go further than that in its inactical operation. Wo have all along our 
New .Jersey shore hardj^ fishermen who in the morning put out to sea in their open boats, and anchor- 
ing from 1 to 10 miles from shore, spend the day in llshing for mackerel with hook and line. They 
thus obtain a livelihood for their familes and they supply, among other places, those numerous seaside 
hotels which are dotting oiirshores. 1 understand that the )>romoters of the bill do not desire to inter- 
fere with this fishery. The number of mackerel caught by the men 1 have indicated constitutes but a 
very small proimrtion of the total catch — is in fiict not even a “droj) in the bucket,” but only one of 
the atoms that make up the drop. To save the rights of these men 1 proposed an amendment which 
has been read. Upon conferring with the friends of the bill 1 have consented to modify that amend- 
ment, and I ask that the Clerk now read it as modilied. 
The Clerk road as follows: 
Add to the end of the first section tlie following : 
I’romcted, however. That nothing in this act shall be held to apply to mackerel caught offshore with hook and line 
from oi)en rowboats of less than 2(1 feet keel and landed in saiil boats. 
Mr. Buchanan. I will say that the terms of this amendment are stricter than I like; but they 
are such as meet the approval of friends of the bill. I earnestly hojte the amendment will bo adopted. 
Those who favor the bill have no objection to the amendment, and those who oppose the bill will vote 
against it whether it be amended or not. 
Mr. Breckinridck, of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I wish to call attention to a few of the authorities 
who, as illy distinguished friend from New York [Mr. Hewitt] said, have expressed themselves upon 
the policy indicated by this bill. They are not, however, as the gentleman believes. Mr. Goode, of 
whom the gentleman justly spoke in very high terms, made the following statement before the inter- 
national lisheries exhibition in London some years ago; 
The importance of the distinction between the extermination of a species, oven in a restricted locality, and the 
destruction of a fishery, should bo noted. The former is somewhat unusu:d and seemingly impossible in the case of oceanic 
species; but the latter, especially for limited regions, is almost of yearly occurrence. 
Now, the gentleman from New York spoke of what this bill proposes to do as a new proposition 
sprung upon this House and not juoperlj’ considered. In this same address, delivered years ago, the 
same distinguished authority to whom I have just referred used the following language: 
There could be no doubt that the extensive fisheries prosecuted by menhaden steamers in the Gidf of Maine were 
p>rejudicial to the shore fishermen by driving the lisli they formerly caught for bait out to sea and beyond tLo reach of 
their nets. 
Speaking of the schools being depredated upon before they came in to our shores, he said: 
There is also reason to believe that our great imrse-seiue fisheries for menhaden and mackerel, though perhaps not 
causing a decrease in the numbers of the fish, have kept them farther from shore. There is a decided disposition on the 
part of the intelligent men engaged in these lisheries to press the passage of a law which should prevent the use of the 
purse seine before the 1st of June. 
This is the language of Mr. Goode himself, used years ago in his address before that international 
assemblage at Loudon. 
