10 
OYSXrCE CULTURE COMMISSION—MIN’UTES Or EVIDENCE. 
ill*. W. J. 13G-1. Then do yon tliink it would be expedient to adopt a policy of that kind here, and to reserve either 
Langliam. one-fourth or oiio-fifth, which should neither bo open to the dredger or to the oystermen cmpIo}cd in 
knocking the oysters otf the rocks? Yes, 1 think it would be ; I tliink it would prevent disputes arising 
21 Xov., 1876. from persons taking spat off each other's ground. I think permission might be granted to take away a 
certain quantity, such as the Inspector might consider necessary for the purpose required, because a 
person might go to a place and take away oysters, iiiul say Ihc}' were for breeding, instead ot which lie 
might use them or sell them for eating. jv i. i 
13G5. But would it not be desirable, in granting these licenses to take oysters oft the rocks ancl man¬ 
groves, to limit them to a jiarlicular river, and not to allow the.men to wander about ironi one rner to 
another under one license? I think the licenses should be given for a certain time and fer a certain river. 
13GG. Then in granting these licenses, would you allow, as they do in Pnince, children or a certain age 
and unmarried daughters to he employed in colleeling the spat? 1 don’t know about the boys, but girls 
and young women 1 think ought to be left out. . , 
13G7. But if the ])arcuts go out, wb}' should they not take their daughters with them . i liardly think 
that would be advisable. ^ i wi j-t 
1368. Arc you aware that some of tlie witnesses cxaminc<l here on a previous day recommended that licenses 
bo issued to persons to get fiystors oft the rocks ? I would sooner sec them licensed to go on the rivers 
and get oysters by the bag than to get them in that wav. ^ , • i 1 ? i- 
13G9. I was coming to that. Do you not think it desirable to have two different kinds or licenses one l or 
those who dredge and anotlier for those who knock the oysters oft the rocks? I think a great many who 
laid licenses to take oysters off the rocks would dredge ; I don’t see how you could prevent it. My idea 
is to reserve certain places especially for spawn, 
1370. Do you see any objection to the Government alienating cither by lease or sale small portions, say 
20 or 40 acres, or whatever extent may be decided upon, and to let the Iioldei’s have the exclusive right to 
the ground, either for a long term of years or for perpetuity? I should say for a long term of years, 
subject to iinprovenieiits ; 1 would not allow a person to take up a lease and do notbing 
1371. You arc aware of the conditions in the Lands Alienation Act, arc yoii not — that when a person 
makes a conditional purchase, ouc of the conditions is that he shall improve it to a certain .extent witliin 
three years? Yes. ... -on o 
1372. Do you see any objection to the introduction of a similar condition into an Oyster Bill r ^o, I 
don’t see any objection. i • t - 
1373. That is to say, he bolds the lease under a condition that improvements shall be made upon it, subject 
to the approval of the Minister, equal to those which would be required on dry land. How would that 
answer, do you think ? 1 think it would answer very well. 
1374. Now with regard to Crown lands on the shores ; do you see any objection to conditional purchasers 
selecting land under water as well as dry land? No, I do not see any objection; I understand you to 
sjieak of places for artilicially cultivating oysters. 
1375. Yes, what I wish to know is whether it is not as desirable for the Government to encourage oyster 
cultivation as well as agricultunil or pastoral pursuits ? Yes, the only thing is that the law would have to 
be very stringent. 
137C. Would it require a more stringent law than that now in force for the conditional purchasers on dry 
land? Well, you can see better what is done on dry laud than you can under water, and persons would 
be taking oystem from their neighbours* ground. 
1377. Could they not just as well steal from their neighbours’ orchards or farms ? Yes, but that would be 
noticed much quicker tliau stealing from an oyster bed. 
1378. What <lopth would such beds be ? They would vary from 3 feet upwards. 
1379. At what depth can you see the bottom of the beds—or 5, or G feet ? No, the water does not run 
nearly so clear on the northern rivers as it does in the George’s Biver and about here. ^ 
1380. Then you think the great fear is that a person might be robbed and not know it ? Yes; that has 
been the case with Ca])taiu Griffin on Limeburner’s Creek. 
1381. lie lias been robbed ? Yes, repeatedly, and he knew nothing about it until be went over the ground 
and found it out. 
13S2. That deals with a separate question — tlio best mode of protecting the oyster beds—but it does not 
appear to me to affect the present question more than it does the protection of orchards or larm-yards. 
You may have read the other day the speech of a bishop who boasted of having robbed orchards when ho 
was a boy at Parramatta. That can always be prevented. Do you think if proper protection were afforded 
and persons were allowed to select land under water as well as above water that oyster culture might bo 
carried on in connection with farming ? Yes. 
1383. And that it would be very advantageous, as when a person was not employed in working his farm ho 
might turn his attention to his oyster beds, and in that way increase his prosperity and happiness ? Yes, 
a great many oyster-s might be grown in that way.* 
1381. You see no objection to it, except on the score of oyster-stealing ? No. 
1385. You tliink there is a great deal of stealing going on ? Yes. 
138G. AV^hat is your opinion as to the best mode of prevention : do you think that if persons were not 
allowed to remove oysters without a ])ass, as in the case of cattle and sheep, the practice would be checked ? 
Yes, that has been an i<lea of mine for a long time past—that the men should all bo licensed and the boats 
marked. I think all the men employed by the le.ssees to remove oysters should have a permit. 
1387. Ts not the receiver, knowing the goods to be stolen, as bod as the thief? Equally, if not more so. 
1388. Is it not possible to put a stop to this stealing to a great extent by issuing licenses to these oyster- 
dealers, and obliging them to do the same as the butchers are compellei to at slaughter-houses—keep a 
record of all that they jnirchase from the oyster merchants ? Yes, 1 have had that idea for some time back. 
1389. .Tust carrying out the same precautions which arc adopted in councctioii with cattle and sheep ? 
Yes, or something similar to them. 
1390. Don’t you think a great improvement could be made in the Oyster Act by adopting the precautions 
which are provided in connection witii other industries; for instance, for cutting limber a license is 
required, and for getting oysters off the rocks a license would be required ; with respect to the droving of 
cattle or sheep a pass is required ; with respect to the removal of oysters from one place to another a 
pass would be required : also, for slauglitering cattle and sliccj) a licenae is required ; and a record has to 
be 
