232 
BULLETIN OF THE UNITED STATES FISH COMMISSION. 
are specially exempted from the operations of the bill. All the men along the coast of New Jersey, 
Delaware, and Massachusetts who have weirs or nets connected with the shore are jnirticularly 
exempted from its operations and will derive increased henelits from this legislation. 
Mr. McPhf.kson. In that respect the bill is bettered by the amendment. There is one other 
question which I should like to suggest. I have somewhere read a statement made by a certain 
professor in Scotland who has made (luite a study of the fish question, and particularly of the 
question of the herring upon the coast of Scotland. It is well known that there is not to he founil 
elsewhere on the face of the earth, in any water anywhere, such a great fishery enterprise as the 
herring fishery on the coast of Scotland. Some years there is a less run of herring than others. This 
professor goes on to say that as to the amount of herring caught from the water by all the lu-ocesses 
which fishermen can employ, whether it he by nets, by seines, by weirs, by hook and line, or what 
not (and wo know something of the quantity caught), the amount of fish taken on the coast of 
Scotland was as one to a million compared with the amount of herring consumed by other fishes. 
I should like to ask the Senator from Michigan what is the necessity of preventing ch.eap food- 
fish being obtained for the people, even during the period 2 iroposed in the bill, if it be true that for 
every fish taken from the water at any season (and it is well known that the herring fishery is 
prosecuted with more vigor and with more profit during the spawning season than any other) a 
million are consumed by other voracious fishes? We know that one class of fish lives U 2 )ou another. 
Then why, ujiou the seacoast, with an ocean 3,000 miles wide, is it necessary bj^ any sort of system 
whatever to yirevent the free occuiiation of the fisherman during any months of the year? 
Look at the menhaden fishery. Within a year or two we find that the menhaden have very greatly 
reduced in numbers, so that in some years it is almost impossible for the men employed in the indus- 
try of catching the fish for the oil and the fat, which I understand is made into fertilizers, to find 
enough menhaden to profitably occupy them. lu other years, again, the menhaden come in immen.se 
quantities. I think it safe to say that although legislation has been attempted here and elsewhere to 
Iirevent fishing for the menhaden along the coast, for every fish taken from the water by the menhaden 
industries there are a million of them consumed by other fish. If it be best to prevent fishing near 
the shore in order that the fish may go back into deeper water and be caught there by bigger fish, then 
there is some justification for this legislation; if not, there is no justification for it. 
The Presiding Officer. The Secretary will report the pending amendment proposed by the 
Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Hoar]. 
The Chief Clerk. In section 1, line 4, it is proposed to strike out “1887” and insert “1888,” so as 
to read : 
That for tlie period of five years from and after the 1st day of July, 1888, no mackerel other th.an wh.it is known as 
.Spanish m.ickerel, ciiught between tlie 1st d,ay of M.irch and the 1st day of June, inclusive, of each year, sliali he imported 
into the United States or landed upon its shores. 
Mr, Frye, I .ask the Senator from Michigan in charge of the bill to move to reconsider the vote 
by which the bill was amended by striking out the word “M<arch” and inserting the word “July,” in 
line 4, and then to accejit the amendment olfered by the Sen.ator from Massachusetts. 
Mr. Palmer. In deference to the wishes of the Senator from Maine, who has a greater interest in 
this bill possibly th.an I have, I will move that the vote by which the amendment was agreed to, 
changing “March” to “July,” in line 4, be reconsidered. 
The Presiding Officer. That can be done by unanimous consent. There being no objection, it 
is so ordered. 
Mr. Palmer. Now, I withdraw the amendment. 
The Presiding Officer. The question recurs on the amendment proposed by the Sen.ator from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Ho.ar] ; which will he read. 
Mr. Saulsrury. Mr. President, during the examination of the fishery question hast f.all we took 
considerable testimony before a committee, of which 1 was a member, on this very subject. I found 
that the men who own the bo.ats as a general rule were in favor of a close time, as they call it, but they 
stated that their men employed in doing the fishing generally urged that they should send out their 
boats to the spring fishing. Not willing to lose the time, they urged the owners of vessels to send 
their vessels down the southern coast in order that they might have employment. 
My understanding is th.at there is a very considerable .amount of fresh mackerel consumed in the 
eastern cities caught between the months of March and .Inly, which furnish cheap food to a class of 
peojile who are not very well able to buy the higher-priced fish. If the bill 2 )ro 2 )oses to restrict th.at 
