490 
THE PISHING GAZETTE 
[June 24, 1893 
journey to Norway, there would have been no 
choice but to order Beyer to pay the whole of the 
cosfe. 
For a good many years complaints have been 
rife among Norway-going anglers as to the 
manner in which they have been treated by the 
Norwegian “middlemen” (“agents” is not the 
pro])er term), speculators in rivers; in most of 
these cases, the causes of complaint have been 
very similar, deceptive descriptions of the water 
let, sinpressio veri generally, and an inadequate 
return in regard to the sport obtained compared 
to the amount of rent charged. To such an 
extent and with so much success have these 
methods been practised upon Englishmen, that 
they have become recognised under the general 
and inclusive term, “The Bergen System.” But 
in spite of the numerous and well-founded 
instances (representing no doubt only a 
moderate proportion of the whole), no one 
until now has taken any more practical step to 
remedy the position than “ to write to the news- 
pajK r.s ” anent their griefs and wrongs. They 
have been done many of them “to a turn,” but 
rather than admit this soft impeachment,or have 
all the bother of a luw-suil, they have paid their 
money and let the steam olf in strong language. 
Mr. Corbett cannot be too highly congratulated 
on ju-oving an exception, and on having taken up 
the cudgels; more esprcially having regard to 
the result of the action, in which, though 
nominally the plaintiff, Beyer was in reality on 
his defence. Not cnly was the judgment of the 
Norwf gian court satisfactory to him personally, 
and as regards the particular question at issue, 
but theofoiter dictum of the judge has pointed cut 
the remedj', frtm a/Inancro/ point of view, open 
to the lessee of a Norway salmon fishing, which, 
on personal inspection does not fulfil the desci ip- 
tion given by the lessor or his agent, and in con- 
scqttence of which the contract was entered into. 
(1 use the qualifying term financial adviseoly, as 
it set ms to me that the rectification of money 
matters only would not indemnify the disap¬ 
pointed lessee in such a case for the loss, as it 
would ]irobably mean to him, of a season’s fish¬ 
ing.) To endeavour to stultify the verdict of a 
court of justice by an appeal to the public through 
the newspapers is always doubtful wisdom ; but 
this is the course Mr. Beyer has adopted, and in 
doing so he has practically constituted himself a 
defender of the “ system,” of which a verv great 
many people to my knowledge (among English 
sportsmen and Norwegians) have long considered 
him an exponent, but which he himseJf absolutely 
denies ever having had anything to do with. By 
insisting on occupying so large a space in the 
English papers too with his explanatory letters, 
he has brought down upon himself a great many 
attacks from people, who, had he quietly accepteei 
the po.-ition, woulel not have had the opportunity 
thus afforded them of pouring out the vials of 
their wrath, and 1 cannot see what reason he has 
for complaint in this regard. 
In addition totl e somewhat voluminous corre¬ 
spondence which has been published, a vast 
number of letters rn the subject have reached the 
editors of the Fishing Gazette and the IGeld from 
former victims under the Bergen system. Tbe 
general tone of these was acidulated, to use a 
mild expression, and quite a crop of libel actions 
nriight have resulttd. Others, again, complained 
bitterly of the ojiportunities afforded to Beyer in 
the way of space to enable him to place his ex¬ 
planation before the public. Not only do these 
complaints appear utterly unreasonable and in bad 
taste, but they come badly from those wbo give free 
expiession to their own grievances and who tcok 
no practical steps themselves to remedy them. It 
is 10 be regretted that more of those interested 
did not adopt Mr. Corbett’s calm and temperate 
ttyle in their communications, in which case 
these would have had much greater weight. The 
result has been the importation into the con¬ 
troversy of a vast deal of extraneous matter, 
which has but little bearing on the questions at 
issue, and which is of no public interest 
whatever. 
I have gene carefully over lilr. Beyer’s pub¬ 
lished letters, and some' of his unpublished ones, 
but 1 cannot see that he has improved his position 
in any’ way. The misrepresentations remain, as 
set forth in the judgment of the court, to all 
intents and purposes unexplained. 1 think I can 
understand a man who is in the habit of letting 
his water frequently, and who has had no com¬ 
plaint from previous tenants of incorrect 
description, omitting to refer to the ex¬ 
istence upon it of a small lake, and perhaps 
even of a salmon trap, but I confess that 
a discrepancy of as near as may be one-third of 
the actual length of the beat seems to me but 
feebly accounted for by Mr. Beyer, when he 
endeavours to throw the onus of the misdescrip¬ 
tion on the author of an article in the Fishing 
Gazette. Certainly if things between lessors and 
lessees of Norwegian salmon fi.shings have been 
conducted in this loose and casual way, it is high 
time such a state of matters were put an end to. 
I cannot imagine a business man, as is Mr. Beyer, 
committing himself to any definite statement as 
to the length of his water without having satisfied 
himself about such an important matter beyond 
fear of mistake. Ignorance cannot be pleaded on 
his behalf, for it is to be remembered that he was 
in the hab.t of visiting the river neaily every 
Sunday throughout the season, in order to 
exercise on those days the right which he retained 
in his contracts with his tenants. 
llis statements, too, made to Mr. Corbett that 
Mr. Sturdy only retained two pools on the 
Evanger or upper river was misleading, for he 
now admits that the description as to the total 
length of that now historic water given in the 
original Fishing Gazette article has by actual 
measurement been proved correct, and" that of 
the 10| or II kilometres to which it extend.®, 3f 
or -I kilometres, belotg to Mr. Sturdy. The latter 
gentleman, too, asserts positively that in piece 
of two pools only, he has the rights upon no 
less than ten, the separate names of which he 
has given to the assessors in Beyer v. Corbett. 
It is difficult to reconcile the two statements, 
but as regards the respective values of the two 
fishings there would seem to be but little doubt; 
in his biief luit pithy epistle, which appeared in 
the Fiihhig Gazette of the 3rd inst., ‘Nels N. 
Bolstad ” wrote: “Everyone at Evanger and 
Bolstad knows that the length of river (referring 
to the lower portion) is more than Beyer says; 
and also that the Englishman (Mr. Sturdy), who 
has fished the river so long, has all the good 
fishing water in the whole river.” 
Some confusion and misapprehension have 
arisen during the correspondence in regard to 
the connec'ion with one another of the two pieces 
of river, in which I fancy Mr. Sturdy has shared, 
he being apparently under the impression that 
ever since the trial Beyer had endeavoured to 
confuse the issues by associating the two. As far 
as I Con make out he has not done so; and, indeed, 
I do not think that Mr. Sturdy need imagine that 
any loss wi'l accrue to him in the depreciation of 
his property by Mr. Beyer’s statements; the 
character of his water is too well known and 
appreciated. As a matter of fact, however, the 
length of the upper river called the Evanger, 
or, as it appears in Herr Landmark’s Official 
Reports, the Vesse liver, which flows from the 
Vangs A^arid into the Evanger lake, is from 
IO5 to 11 kilometres in length, and that of the 
Bolstad between the latter sheet of water and the 
fjoid is 4 kilometres. 
I cannot see matter for surprise in the number 
of disappo ntments which have been experienced 
of late years in regard to salmon fishings let to 
Englishmen by Beigen middlemen. The desire 
to liave a river in Norway now amounts to a 
pericet ertze, and frequently the acute man of 
business here in England will without hesitation 
accept the word of a foreigner, of whom he knows 
nothing, as to the merits and value of a piece of 
wafer, of which he knows, if possible, less. 
Is it to be wondered at that advantage is taken 
of such astonishingly implicit confidence y 
The impression, too, .seems still a common one 
that Norwegian salmon are invariably possessed 
with a consuming de,-ire to be caught, and that 
the veriest tyro has only got to show Iiimself on 
the banks of a stream armed with the latest 
improvements in the way of ge.ar in order to secure 
as many fish as he pileases. All I can say is, that 
the said tyro will not long remain under that 
impressitn. Norway salmon he will find want 
catching just as much as do their Scotch and 
Iiish brethren; like them, they lave their little 
ways. 
When, therefore, Mr. Beyer makes reference in 
one of h:s letters to the comparative ignorance of 
the art displayed by some of his former tenants, 
I am inclined to think he has hit a right nail on 
the head, and has—inadvertently perhaps— 
thrown some light upon certain testimonials, and 
the cause of their being given. No one, of course, 
can guarantee sport to his tenant, and it by no 
means follows that water which is good one year 
or one month should be good the next. 
In respect, however, to this water of Mr. 
Beyer’s, on the Evanger riv’er, the present 
owner’s opinion of i's value would seem to differ 
very considerably from those of other people, 
and there are material discrepancies regarding 
the rent charged fer it by him which are difficult 
to account for. Mr. Beyer asserts that he “ does 
not need the Corbett bag of 6351b. in thirty (it 
should be thirty-two) days to shield roy’self 
behind, as a friend of mine, on my water, made a 
much better bag than that—viz., 3861b. in twelve 
days, and that even on days which he could not 
select when weather and state of water was 
good.” In the same letter he also refers to a 
catch of 9531b. in sixty-two days, made in 1891 by 
apparently two rods. Nevertheless, it is the 
despised “ Corbett bag’’which is quoted in the 
circulars of his agents this season; and that this 
was an exceptionally good one, on account of the 
wetness of the season of 1892, would seem to 
admit of but little doubt. 
In these days when the rich man does not care 
what he pays for a fad, it is quite impossible to 
say that £'60 a month (which Beyer says is his 
regular charge) is too high even for such very 
moderate water. The place is extremely handy 
and accessible. But in Land and Water of the 
10th inst. there is a letter from Mr. II. Reginald 
Corbet, in which he plainly states that for the 
privilege of fishing this identical piece of water 
for a month he on one occasion paid Beyer no 
less a sum than £100, and that during that period 
he and his party did not so much as rise or even 
see a fish of any sort. In same letter, too, Mr. 
Corbet mentions having rented the Forde river 
from Beyer for a month for a like sum (£100), 
when the three gentlemen who constituted tbe 
party got, in all, “ fourteen salmon, none of them 
probably over 151b.” Mr. Beyer’s standard of 
fair sport would seem to be 2s a pound fish 
caught, and, although holding a different opinion 
myself, I am not going to argue the point; rent 
calculated in this way savours more of the fish¬ 
monger than the fisherman. But most people, I 
fancy, will agree that £1 per pound is rather a 
stiff ordt r. “As a matter of fact,” writes Mr. 
Beyer, “ever since 1 got the extent of water 
which Mr. Corbett had, and which is the water in 
question, I have just made both ends meet from 
the rents obtained.” All I can say is that if such 
a meagre result is only arrived by making such 
charges, I marvel at his anxiety to have any¬ 
thing more to do with it. In former days the 
Beigen merchants frequently rented fishings in 
the neighbourhood, and by subletting them for 
the greater part of the season, had their own 
sport for nothing. Bub nowadays the services 
of a reliable agent are of no inconsMerable value, 
and it is but just they should be requited. 
It has been stated that even tfiis year Mr. 
Beyer had, m instructing his London agents as 
to letting his Evanger water, omitted to mention 
the exisience of the salmon trap and of the small 
lake. It is light to say that this is not so. I have 
before me his original letter to Messrs. Baton and 
Sons, dated December 3, 1892, in which he 
distinctly refers to both. The “ testimonial ” ques¬ 
tion seems to me a very delicate, from certain 
points of view a very unpleasant, one. It is 
natural enough that sportsmen with whom Mr. 
Beyer has been on friendly terms should stretch 
a point, and when asked to give a letter should 
make it as favourable as pussible. Unless, how¬ 
ever, they have substantial grounds for the 
experiences detailed or suggested in such letters, 
the writers make a great mistake in giving them 
at all. 'I'hey have already done mischief enough, 
and it is to be hoped that in future, knowing the 
purpose for which they are obtained, sportsmen 
will be more careful and accurate in the wording 
of these documents. Many of those o »ned by Mr. 
Beyer are no doubt intrinsically valuable, and 
relate to satisiactory experiences with him, but it 
is well to remember that ordinarily speaking, and 
for really practical piurposes. a testimonial should 
detail the bag made on the river in question, 
between two specific dates, and slate the amount 
of nnt paid. .My apologies are due for the 
