372 
THE PISHING GAZETTE 
[May 20, 1893 
-M AY-FLTES—GEILSE—A BIG FLOUNDER, 
See. 
Sir,—U nder the heading “ An Early May-fly,” 
reference is made to a ]\Jay-fly sent you from the 
Costa, Yorkshire, on November 21, 1887. I 
gather from the Fishing Gazette, of December 22, 
1888, that a live IMay-fly, caught on the River 
IV^ye, in the Haddon lileadows, Derbyshire, on 
the l.^)th of that month, was forwarded to yon, 
Other specimens, secured Sept. 11 and Nov. 10, 
were reported in the Fishing Gazette of Sept. 17, 
1887, and Nov. 16, 1889, respectively. An odd 
May-fly or two may be no uncommon thing in 
the middle of July, but a regular rise of fly on 
the Kennet, above Hungerford, on the last 
day of that month, as recorded in the Field of 
August 8, 1891, is certainly noteworthy. 
In the Fishing Gazette of the 6th inst. your 
correspondent says: “If I remember rightly it 
is a dozen years since grilse were so backward 
in the season in putting in an appearance in the 
North.” Am I correct in stating that the first 
reported capture of grilse this year was on April 
21 .P If so, it is the same date as in 1892, and in 
1890 the first was taken May 2, nearly a month 
later than in the previous year. 
In the Thames (Windsor) report of 6th inst. 
Mr. B. R. Bambridge states, “Within the last 
few days I have noticed quantities of ‘ millers’ 
thumbs ’ and loach lying at the bottom of the 
water dead.” Can you kindly inform me whether 
the fish named are common to the Thames, as on 
reference to the report of a reading by IMr. M. H. 
Blarney, entitled the “ Natural History of the 
Thames,” given before the members of tbe 
Richmond Piscatorial Society, at the Greyhound, 
in December, 1887, it was stated that “ sixteen 
different kinds of fresh-water fish are found in 
the river, viz., trout, pike, perch, barbel chub, 
bream, carp, tench, roach, rudd, dace, gudgeon, 
flounder, pope, bleak, and minnow, besides eels, 
lamperns, and lampreys.” miller’s thumbs and 
loach not being included P 
Your Norfolk correspondent this week refers 
to a flounder 18in. long, lOin. wide. Is not this 
a very extraordinary specimen, as the late 
Greville Fennell thought one of lOJin. long, and 
fiiin. across worthy of comment ?—I am, sir, 
yours, &c.. Giant. 
Hanover Park, Peckham, May 15, 1893. 
THE MAY-FLY" ON THE COLNE. 
De.ar Sir, —The rise of May-fly commenced on 
my water, Delaford Park, on the Colne brook, last 
Tuesday, the 9th inst., and has been steady ever 
since.—Y’ours faithfully, W. S. Caine. 
THE MAY-FLY" UP IN HEREFORDSHIRE. 
Sir, —The May-fly is rising fast on our rivers 
—Lugg, Arrow, and Pinsley.—YMurs truly, 
R. T. Williams. 
Lugg Cottage, Kingsland, R.S.O. 
[A friend who lives near YYareham, Dorset, 
tells us the fly was up in clouds and the fish 
taking it well on May 12.—Ed.] 
■ MA.Y"-FLIES ON ETON BRIDGE. 
Dear Sir, —These ought to give you the trout 
fever ; they are out here to-d. y round the bridge 
in quantities greater than I have ever sfen before. 
—Y'ours faithfully, R. B. Bambridge. 
[ilr. Bambridge sends us some IMay-flies in all 
stages, from just hatched to spent gnats. The 
fever has been on some time.— Ed.] 
MORE RUDD FOR THE THAMES. 
Dear Marston, — The second lot of rudd 
arrived to-day, but unfortunately owing to the 
great heat, I regret to say there must have been 
quite one half of them dead. 
I put the remainder in my punt well, when 
they soon came round perfectly strong, and in 
the afternoon placed them in suitable places this 
side of Hampton Court in the Thames. 
^ ery many thanks for them. I hope the little 
fellows will steer clear of the jack, they were so 
plump and in perfect condition, and about 2in. 
to 2Ain. long. — With best wishes, faithfully 
jours, Alfred Nuthall, 
President, Thames Angling 
Preservation Society. 
Kingston, May 13, 1893. 
[Y e sent Mr. Nuthall twelve hundred, and 
regret so many died on the way.— Ed.] 
SALMON FRY OR SMOLT SAID TO BE 
KILLED WHOLESALE ON THE RIBBLE 
AND ITS TRIBUTARIES. 
Dear Sir, —I should like to refer to a letter 
in your issue of May 6. 
I can corroborate to a large extent the curious 
statement of your correspondent as to killing 
smolts by holders of salmon licences. 
The river referred to is evidently the Ribble and 
its tributaries, especially the Hodder, in former 
days one of the best sea-trout rivers in the North 
of England, and a well-known salmon river. 
The Hodder, the great spawning bed of the 
salmon and sea-trout, I have known since boy¬ 
hood. Owing to pollution and the fact that half 
the water supply has been cut off by tbe Preston 
and Blackburn Corporations for their reservoirs, 
the fishing has depreciated for some years past. 
Smelts or smolts are now killed wholesale—many 
a rod taking a hundred in a day. I know a 
keeper on part of the river who is always fishing, 
and no doubt he is responsible for not less than 
from ten to twenty thousand a season. 
The position the conservators take up is, I 
believe, this : that no one who holds a salmon 
licence will be prosecuted for killing smelts or 
smolts, but those persons holding trout licences 
are limited to trout. 
Persons consequently take out salmon licences 
with the express purpose of killing salmon fry, and 
the conservators depend to a large extent on 
their revenue derived from this source. 
It is a matter of regret that none of the land- 
owners in the district will bestir themselves; 
there is no reason why the river should not 
return to its former greatness. Last Easter I 
counted about fifty salmon waiting to return to 
the sea during half-a-mile’s walk along the river. 
It is a crying injustice that this massacre of 
the innocents cannot be put down with a strong 
hand, and the conservators compelled to put the 
Salmon Fishery Acts into force—the sole object 
for which the board was brought into existence 
being to carry out these Acts. 
AVhether they can be compelled by the Local 
Government Board, or any private individual, I 
cannot say. 
I trust you will bring your powerful aid to 
help us poor anglers in the North, and I trust the 
ventilation of our grievances in your columns 
will result in immediate beneficial reform. The 
lasting harm that is being caused in this river 
every year cannot be estimated. —I am, dear sir, 
yours faithfully. Silver T.ail. 
Fly-fishers’ Club. _ 
SALMON SMOLT TAKEN BY ANGLERS— 
SPROD AND MORT. 
Dear Sir, —I see in your edition for the 13th, 
that “ H. W.” thinks I must have been mistaken 
about the fish I called smelt or smolt. He thinks 
they are perhaps sprods. 
There is no mistake, the fish are smolt. Sprods 
and morts do not generally run up the river in 
question until August or July. Again, these 
fish were only 5|in. or 6|in. long, and anglers 
don’t usually get over a hundred sprods or morts 
in a day, and 1 know of several anglers who have 
caught over a hundred of these smolt in a day. 
These fish are doing their level best now to get 
to the sea in spite of the scarcity of water.— 
Y"ours sincerely, W. J. T. 
Blackburn. 
P.S.—Could “H. W.” please tell me what the 
fish that he calls sprods and morts really are P 
Are they sea-trout, or young salmon returning 
from the sea ?—W. J. T. 
TG KEEP LIVE BAITS AND ’WORYIS. 
Dear Sir, —W^ould any of your correspondents 
kindly inform me how to keep live bait, as I 
frequently have a quantity left after fishing, 
which I cannot keep alive but for a few days ; also 
how to preserve worms ? A few hints on the above 
will be gratefully received by—Y"ours faithfully. 
Meeting-street, Wedneebury, Amateur. 
May 15, 1893. 
[We have noticed that dace and roach live 
well if kept in a bath or tub with only enough 
water just to cover them, but in hot weather you 
must watch them well. Keep them in a cool 
cellar or dairy. Worms should be kept'in a cool 
cellar, in an old butter tub half filled with fresh 
damp earth, with sweet fresh moss on top changed 
daily.— Ed.] 
Y"HO WAS THE INVENTOR OF THE 
“JOCK SCOTT”? 
Sir, —Mr. E. M. Tod, in his interesting 
“Reminiscences of an Old Angler,” in the issue 
of the Fishing Gazette dated May 13, incidentally 
mentions that he has often seen the inventor of 
the famous fly the “ Jock Scott.” 
Several claims have been put forward on behalf 
of different people as being the inventor, and in 
the face of this want of unanimity it is puzzling 
to know to whom the credit attaching to the 
originator really belongs. 
If Mr. Tod, or anyone else, could, of their own 
definite knowledge, settle the point authoritatively, 
the information would be welcomed as an impor¬ 
tant addition to the history of the best known and 
most celebrated of all our salmon flies.—Y"oura 
faithfully, Hugh Fraser. 
[Mr. A. N. Cheney, Angling Editor of Shooting 
and Fishing, Boston, U.S.A., has this interesting 
note on Jock Scott in a recent number of his 
capital paper: 
“I presume that if a vote should be taken 
among American salmon fishermen to decide 
which of the many salmon flies was the favourite, 
that the Jock Scott would be elected to the place 
of honour by a handsome majority', and it is more 
than likely that the Silver Doctor would be a 
good second. The Fishing Gazette, London, 
procured an expression of opinion on this subject 
not very long ago, as was noted in Shooting and 
Fishing at the time, and out of about a score of 
lists of ‘best flies’ the Jock Scott occupied a 
prominent place in all but one or two. 
“ Mr. Archibald Mitchell has very kindly sent 
me a copy of the Berwickshire News, Scotland, 
containing a notice of the death of the inventor 
of the Jock Scott fly, from which I quote ; ‘ To 
all salmon anglers the name of Jock Scott is such 
a household word that I feel no apology is needed 
to your readers, many of whom must have killed 
dozens of fish with this fly, for inserting a notice 
of the inventor, whose name it bears, on his 
death, which took place on Jan. 24 (1893) at 
Langshaw Cottage, a shooting lodge belonging 
to the Earl of Haddington, overlooking the 
valley of the Tweed, which he loved so well, and 
in whose silvery stream the first specimen of his 
fly was tried. 
“ ‘John Scott, better known as Jock, was born 
at Branxholme, Roxburghshire, in February, 1817, 
and began his sporting career at the early age of 
thirteen, going into the service of the then 
Marquis of Lothian, under the head keeper, 
Robert Kerss, at whose able hands he firstlearned 
how to tie a fly. Here, however, he only remained 
two years, at the end of which time that prince 
of Border sportsmen, the late Lord John Scott, 
happened to see him, and, taking a fancy to the 
look of him, asked him his name, and on his 
saying Jock Scott, offered to take him into his 
service. This offer Jock readily accepted, and 
remained there for twenty-seven years, viz, to 
within a short time of the lamented death of his 
lordship. After a year or two spent in tying flies 
for sale, he became keeper to Lord John’s inti¬ 
mate friend and brother sportsman, the present 
Earl of Haddington, in whose service he died. . . 
It was when acting as fisherman to Lord John 
at Makerstown in 1850, a rather unfortunate year 
for the angler, that he set himself to devise some¬ 
thing really new and taking; the “Jock Scott” 
was the result, and on trying it himself he was 
so pleased with it that he gave a pattern to the 
late Mr. Forrest, fishing tackle maker, Kelso, 
who one day— I think at Bemersyde—after trying 
a lot of flies in vain, put it on, with such marked 
success, that he thereupon named it after the 
inventor; and “Jock Scott” it will remain while 
salmon swim in the Tweed. With Jock’s death 
has passed away another link with the old days, 
when to be a sportsman was, at any rate, to be a 
man.’ Mr. Mitchell adds to this a note in which 
he says, ‘ This account is undoubtedly authentic.’ ” 
Mr. Geo. M. Kelson says: “Other origin than 
that of its intrinsic worth, of its legendary influ¬ 
ence, equally observable in the brightest or 
dullest weather or water, there is none; ” he adds 
that its inventor was “ the late Lord John Scott’s 
water bailiff.” We confess we don’t quite under¬ 
stand Mr. K.’s remark, that its only origin is its 
intrinsic worth and legendary influence, its 
“ worth” and “influence” could not have existed 
before its origin, or originated it.— Ed.] 
