OTSTEE CULTTOE COMMISSI.ON—MDTOTES OP ETEDEKCE. 
49 
1717. But in England you did not follow the business at all? 'No, my occupation in England was a Mr.J.Knight, 
different one altogether. 
1718. What was your emplopuent when you were engaged in the oyster trade? I used to catch the 1 Bee., 1876- 
oysters and sell them to the dealers, on the river Morpeth and other places. 
1719. Can you tell the Commission what was the state of the oysters beds when you first commenced 
business ; were the oysters more plentiful then than they arc at present ? Tes, you might get any amount by 
dredging foi* them ; in fact the banks were covcm ed with them—some of the choicest oysters, too. 
1720. The banks were covered ? Yes, portions of the river Hunter that used to be dry at low tide. 
When the water went off you could pick them up—choice, good oysters. 
1721. AVhat was the nature of the soil on which you found them ? It was a rocky soil. 
1722. Is there any rich mud there? Yes, in certain localities. 
1723. Did you not find the oysters thrive best Avhere there was rich mud? Yes, but when there is too 
much of it it smothers them. 
1724. I do uot mean in excess, but sufficient to afford them food in the numerous insects which abound in 
it ? Yes, that would be beneficial. 
1725. Tliey would not thrive so well on the bare rock as where there is mud ? No. 
172G. Is that your experience ? Yes. 
1727. And at the present time there are not nearly so many oysters as there were formerly ? I cannot say 
w'hat there are now. 1 have not been in the business lately. 
1728. How' long is it since you discontinued it ? About four or five years. 
1729. Was it in consequence of the scarcity of oysters that you left off? No; my wife wished to 
shift from Newcastle, and 1 came away, or else I should have gone on with it. I have been for eighteen 
years getting itiy living solely by oysters—that and fisliing. I never followed any other pursuit. 
1730. But up to the time you left, the oyster beds had fallen off very considerably ? Yes. I don’t know 
the cause, unless it was a succession of fioods, and the debris brought down by the floods covered over some 
of the places where there were the most oysters. 
1731. Don't you think over-dredging has had something to do with it ? I don’t think it has, sir. 
1732. You gave evidence before a Select Committee of the Legislative Assembly some years ago, in 1867, 
I believe ? Yes. 
1733. Did you uot say then that there had been a good deal of over-dredging ? Oh, there was an abundance 
of oysters then ; I never found the least scarcity. 
1734. Had there been any falling off in the beds ? There was in certain localities, where the debris from 
the floods had covered them over and destroyed them. 
1735. Did you not tell the Committee that great quantities of oysters had been sent to Sydney to be 
burned for lime ? Not to Sydney, sir ; they were burned in the locality for limo, quantities of live 
oysters. 
1736. In answer to a question put by Mr. Parnell — “ Wliat quantity of oysters do the Newcastle oyster 
catchers send to the Sydney market weekly ? ” you stated — “ They have fallen off lately wonderfully. I 
have known 200 or 300 hags to be sent, two or three years ago ; at the present time I should think not 
more than fifty or sixty bags weekly” ? Yes. 
1737. Then in reply to another question, — “ Are there many persons in Newcastle now getting live oysters 
for lime-burning?” you stated— “ A great many are engaged in getting shells. The children pick out 
some of the oysters, hut I should think there are some hundreds of bushels of shells bunied for lime 
weekly at Newcastle ”? So they have ; at least, they did at that time. 
1738. Then you say, when you are asked whether some of the beds are becoming exhausted, — “ Tliey are. 
At Pullerton Cove, which produced some of the finest oysters on the Hunter, there is a foot deep of mud, 
in consequence of the oysters having been taken away. There is an area of at least 10 acres, which was 
once a mass of oysters, now destroyed in consequence of having been taken away to burn for lime ”? 
Yes, that was the case. 
1739. Then there had been a considerable falling off when you gave that evidence ? Yes, there had. 
1740. The oyster beds were not in the same state as when you first knew them ? No, there was an abun¬ 
dance of oysters then. 
1741. They had fallen off since that time ? Yes; some of them were destroyed by the floods, and others 
had been collected in boat-loads and burned for lime. 
1742. It appears to me that there is some discrepancy. in your evidence. {Evidence read from the com¬ 
mencement hy the shorthand writer.) Do you wish, your evid^ence to stand ? Yes, I think it is very correct. 
1743. You gave evidence before the Select Committee in 1867 on the subject of leasiim land for oyster 
culture, and on what could be done if each person knew what was his own portion ? Yes. 
1744. 1 was struck with one answer you gave, — “ If I were now to lay down a lot of stones, or shells and 
oysters, in some isolated place, where there had never been an oyster before, when they became in a fit 
stiiic for market, some other man would perhaps come and take them, and I could not help myself. I 
fancy it would bo beneficial even if wc had to pay a little, we should be able to produce a tenfold better 
article and ten times the quantify ”? I am of the same opinion now. 
1745. You are aware that the object of this Commission is to inquire into the best mode of cultivating 
and utiliy-ing the oyster, and of maintaining and improving the natural beds, in order to recommend to the 
Government the necessary legislation to secure those objects. AYe wish to have your opinion on the 
subject. What would you suggest as the best policy to adopt, in order to achieve the results to which 
you refer in your evidence — “ to produce a tenfold better article, and ten times the ([uantity” ? I will tell 
you what I should do if I had a bed myself, and what I think would be beneficial to the community at 
large. 
1746. Well, first of all, what quantity of land would you require ? I think an acre would he enough. 
1747. What kind of land would you select for your purpose ? The most rocky 1 could find. ^ 
1748. AYould tliat be for breeding, or for growing and fattening. The two processes are quite distinct, 
are they not ? Y^es. 
1749. \Yould your object be to breed oysters, or to grow and fatten them, or both? Both, in certain 
localities; I should shift them when they were large enough. 
1750. But this acre of ground you would use for the purpose of breeding ? Eor breeding and fattening 
altogether. 
23—G 
1761. 
