THE SOUTHERN SPRING MACKEREL FISHERY. 
255 
This is a i):iranel case. They are driving the old and the wise and the mature mackerel olt from our 
coast, and there is no other conclusion you can come to by looking at these tables. Have I answered 
the gentleman ? 
Mr. Miller. To the satisfaction of the ehairnian of the committee, I have no doubt, but scarcely 
to the satisfaction of the Senator frenn New York. 
I am not able to see the wisdom of cutting olf lishiug entirely for fear that in some future ages, 
it may bo a geological period of a million years more or loss, wo can not tell when, if this tiling be 
allowed to go on there may be some diminution in the number of lish, or, as the Senai-or says, wo 
may frighten the wise and old lish away from our shores by the harassing methods of purse-seine 
fishing. 
Mr. Palmer. Will not the Senator allow me to go onf It seems I have pierced his armor, and if 
he does concede that in course of time the lish in the sea may bo all'ected by this wholesale purse-seine 
fishing 
Mr. Miller. No; I do not admit that even in the course of time that maybe so. It cannot 
happen. 
Mr. Palmer. If the Senator will confine his remarks to <|uestiou8 and not let them elongate into 
speeches, I shall be willing to answer anything that he proiiouuds, if I can. 
Mr. Miller. I was trying to follow the example of the distinguished chairman of the committee 
in making my questions as long as he makes his answers to some questions that I have pnqiouuded; 
but I have not succeeded in doing that, and therefore I will come back to the more ordinary and 
straight Anglo-Saxon style. Why not then, as I have asked before, I now ask the chairman if he 
fears the driving away of these fish from our shores by frightening the old and wise ones by purse- 
seine lishing — why not prevent fishing entirely for the other nine months in the year; why allow it to 
take jilace only off the coast of Maine and Massachusetts? 
Mr. Palmer. I will get the Senator on the general question if he will not go on and make another 
siieech. I will tell you the reason. It is because purse-seme fishing is much more economical than 
fishing by hook and line; and the regard of the Fisheries Committee and of the fishermen of Massa- 
chusetts aud Maine for the constituents of the Senator from New York to the extent that they may 
have cheap food and cheap fish, has merely asked for a three months’ close season instead of a six 
months’ close season. It is much more economical to take fish with the purse seine than with the 
hook and line. The cheaper fish is caught the cheaper it can be sold. That is the reason that it 
would be followed. 
Another thing, the spawning season is past, and the timidity which we know affects all animals 
about the reproductive i>eriod has disappeared, and the raid made upon these immense schools does 
not have the same effect upon them that it does about the reproductive period. Is that satisfactory 
to the Senator from New York? , 
Mr. Miller. No; it is not satisfactory at all. I am not able to understand why the Senator 
desires to stop purse-seine fishing when the fish are off the coast of the Carolinas and Virginia and 
New York, and he is willing to let it go on during the remainder of the year when the fish are off' the 
coast of Massachusetts and Maine. I do not see why he wants to lueserve the fish in every case and 
prevent their being frightened by these terrible fishermen, and is entirely willing they should carry 
on their nefarious methods off the coast of Maine and Massachusetts. 
Mr. Palmer. If all the explanation I have made in regard to the damage to the fish during the 
mouths from the 1st of March to the 1st of July is not satisfactory to the Senator from New York, 
though one should rise from the dead he could not be affected. I think I have answered that ((uestion 
fifteen or twenty times. It is not because they appear off the coast of North Carolina, or off' Hatteras 
or New Jersey, that the close season is established; it is not because the pcox)le of those States are to 
be discriminated against; but it is because the fish, in the first iilace, are conqiaratively good for 
nothing; and, in the second place, it is the spawning season and the schools arc broken up and they 
are deflected from their proper route aud from their feeding grounds. 
The Senator from Now York says that the object of this bill, the reason that it is pushed at the 
instance of the fishermen from Maine and Massachusetts, is that as the catch of fish has been increased 
the price has run down.- That is not the fact. The i>rice has not run down, as the tables show, except 
as the quality has carried it down. You will find the low prices follow the quality rather than the 
amount. 
The gentleman says that it has been the jiolicy of all civilized people in all times to protect 
their fisheries. That is just what we arc trying to do to-day. We arc doing what 5,000 fisher- 
